THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

RIVERSIDE 


^ 


THE   NEW  WORD 


THE  NEW  WORD 

An  Open  Letter  addressed 

to  the  Swedish  Academy  in  Stockholm 

on  the  meaning  of  the  word 

IDEALIST 


BY 

ALLEN  UPWARD 

CORRESPONDING    MEMBER    OF    THE    PARNASSUS   PHILOLOGICAL 
SOCIETY,    ATHENS 


'  Never  change  native  Nanus^ 
For  there  are  Names  in  every  nation,  God-given, 
Of  unexplained  power  in  the  Mysteries." 

Chaldcean  Oracle 


MITCHELL   KENNERLEY 
NEW  YORK         MCMXIV 


Copyright  igio  by 
Mitchell  Kennerley 


HEADS 

PAGE 

1.  The  Riddle 9 

2.  Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation       ...  27 

3.  Etymology:  The  Castle  in  the  Air     ....  46 

4.  Lexicography:  The  Play  upon  Words    ...  60 

5.  Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards     ....  74 

6.  Altruism :  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     .     .  85 

7.  Materialism:  The  Shape lOi 

8.  Physics:  The  Knot 116 

9.  Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone       .      .      .  126 

10.  Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb       .      .      .  141 

11.  Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick       .      .      .  156 

12.  Logic:  The  Cipher 167 

13.  Ontology:  The  End 178 

14.  Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal     ....  192 

15.  Biology:  The  Elf 206 

16.  Theology:  The  Painted  Window     ....  224 

17.  Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit 243 

18.  Pathology:  The  Pyramid 260 

19.  Astrology:  The  Eclipse 278 

20.  Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette     .....  294 

21.  The  Heir    . .:     .     .  31 1 


FIRST  HEAD 


THE  RIDDLE 

The  Nobel  Prize. — i.      Philanthropy   and  'Barabbas 

2.  Charity  and  Genius. — 3.  ''Idealistic." — 4.  Eleven 
Guesses. — 5.  Prize  for  a  New  Religion. — 6.  Challenge 
to  Materialism? — 7.  The  Academy  and  the  Idealist. — 
8.     The  Bequest  in  Abeyance. 

ALFRED  BERNHARD  NOBEL,  maker  of 
^  dynamite,  died  in  the  year  1896,  and  by  his 
will  gave  the  bulk  of  his  great  wealth  to  benefit 
mankind,  by  these  remarkable  provisions: — 

"With  the  residue  of  my  convertible  estate  I  hereby 
direct  my  Executors  to  proceed  as  follows:  They  shall 
convert  my  said  residue  of  property  into  money,  which  they 
shall  then  invest  in  safe  securities;  the  capital  thus  se- 
cured shall  constitute  a  fund,  the  interest  accruing  from 
which  shall  be  annually  awarded  in  prizes  to  those  persons 
who  shall  have  contributed  most  materially  to  benefit  man- 
kind during  the  year  immediately  preceding. 

"  The  said  interest  shall  be  divided  into  five  equal 
amounts  to  be  apportioned  as  follows: — 

"  One  share  to  the  person  who  shall  have  made  the 
most  important  discovery  or  invention  in  the  domain  of 
Physics; 

"  One  share  to  the  person  who  shall  have  made  the 
most  important  Chemical  discovery  or  improvement; 

"  One  share   to  the  person  who  shall   have  made  the 


lo  The  New  Word 

most  important  discovery  in  the  domain  of  Physiology  or 
Medicine  ; 

"  One  share  te  the  person  who  shall  have  produced  in 
the  field  of  Literature  the  most  distinguished  work  of  an 
ideah'st  tendency; 

"  And  finally,  one  share  to  the  person  who  shall  have 
most  or  best  promoted  the  Fraternity  of  Nations  and  the 
Abolition  or  Diminution  of  Standing  Armies  and  the 
Formation  and  Increase  of  Peace  Congresses. 

"  The  prizes  for  Physics  and  Chemistry  shall  be  aw^arded 
by  the  Sw^edish  Academy  of  Science  in  Stockholm;  the  one 
for  Physiology  or  Medicine  by  the  Caroline  Medical  In- 
stitute in  Stockholm;  the  prize  for  Literature  by  the 
Academy  in  Stockholm,  and  that  for  Peace  by  a  Committee 
of  five  persons  to  be  elected  by  the  Norwegian  Storthing. 

"  I  declare  it  to  be  my  express  desire  that  in  the  awarding 
of  prizes  no  consideration  whatever  be  paid  to  the  nation- 
ality of  the  candidates;  that  is  to  say,  that  the  most  deserv- 
ing be  awarded  the  prize,  whether  of  Scandinavian  origin 
or  not." 


The  more  attentively  we  study  these  provisions 
the  more  we  shall  be  struck  by  their  originality  and 
insight. 

Hitherto  the  hereditary  objects  of  charity  have 
been  the  sad  leavings  of  mankind — 

The  poor,  whose  broken  lives 
Lie  underneath  great  empires'  pageantry 
Like    rubble   underneath    rich    palace   walls. 


The  Riddle  1 1 

Nobel  is  the  first  philanthropist  who  has  desired 
to  benefit  the  forerunners  of  the  race,  as  well  as  the 
laggards,  and  who  has  seen  that  in  benefiting  them 
he  would  benefit  all  the  rest. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  human  outcasts.  Man, 
in  his  march  upward  out  of  the  deep  into  the  light, 
throws  out  a  vanguard  and  a  rearguard,  and  both  are 
out  of  step  with  the  main  body.  Humanity  con- 
demns equally  those  who  are  too  good  for  it,  and 
those  who  are  too  bad.  On  its  Procrustean  bed  the 
stunted  members  of  the  race  are  racked;  the  giants 
are  cut  down.  It  puts  to  death  with  the  same  ruth- 
less equality  the  prophet  and  the  atavist.  The  poet 
and  the  drunkard  starve  side  by  side. 

Of  these  two  classes  of  victims  the  stragglers  are 
not  more  in  need  than  the  forlorn  hope;  but  the  am- 
bulance has  always  waited  in  the  rear.  It  would 
seem  as  though  the  vanity  of  benevolence  were 
soothed  by  the  sight  of  degradation,  but  affronted 
by  that  of  genius.  Even  the  loafer  and  the  criminal 
have  found  friends.  The  thinker  and  the  discoverer 
have  been  left  to  the  struggle  for  existence.  For 
tliem  are  no  asylums;  for  them  no  societies  stand 
ready  to  offer  help.  Millions  have  been  spent  in 
providing  libraries  for  the  populace;  the  founder  of 
German  literature  was  refused  a  librarian's  place. 
And  so  philanthropy  has  cast  its  vote  to  this  day  for 
Barabbas. 

Nobel  alone  has  had  the  courage  not  to  be  afraid 
of  genius,   and  the  wisdom  to  see  that   whatever 


12  The  New  Word 

IS  conferred  on  it  really  is  conferred  on  all  man- 
kind. 

The  third  of  these  bequests  may  serve  to  illustrate 
the  superiority  of  Nobel's  method. 

Many  benefactors  have  desired  to  relieve  bodily 
suffering.  But  they  have  discerned  no  way  of  doing 
this  'except  by  building  a  hospital  for  the  advantage 
of  a  limited  class.  Nobel's  aim  has  been  at  once 
wider  and  higher.  He  has  sought  to  relieve  all 
suffering.  He  has  demanded  worldwide  remedies; 
he  has  offered  rewards  for  the  abolition  of  disease. 

And  in  doing  so  he  has  at  the  same  time  remedied 
a  great  injustice,  by  endowing  medical  discovery. 
The  mechanical  inventor  has  long  had  it  in  his  power 
to  acquire  wealth  by  the  sale  of  his  idea.  Nobel's 
own  fortune  owed  its  rise  to  a  patented  invention. 
But  the  noble  etiquette  of  the  healer's  calling  volun- 
tarily renounces  an  advantage  that  would  hinder  the 
relief  of  human  pain.  In  medicine  every  advance 
made  by  one  is  placed  freely  at  the  service  of  all. 
For  such  saviours  of  humanity  there  has  been  hith- 
erto no  material  recompense,  and  humanity  has  been 
content  that  it  should  be  so.  Neither  parliaments 
nor  emperors  have  ever  wished  that  the  healers  of 
men  should  take  rank  with  their  destroyers,  and  that 
a  Pasteur  should  receive  the  rewards  of  a  Krupp. 
Nobel  willed  otherwise. 

The  fifth  bequest  contains  a  yet  more  striking 
instance  of  that  refined  and  beautiful  inspiration 
which  distinguishes  the  Testament  of  Nobel. 


The  Riddle  13 

This  IS  a  bequest  for  practical  work  on  behalf  of 
peace,  disarmament  and  the  fraternity  of  nations. 
At  the  time  when  Nobel  drew  up  his  will  these  aspira- 
tions seemed  to  have  no  more  active  enemies  than 
the  Norwegian  people.  Norway  was  seeking  sepa- 
ration from  Sweden,  and  seeking  it  in  that  temper 
of  hatred  which  unhappily  accompanies  such  move- 
ments almost  everywhere.  The  Norwegian  Stor- 
thing was  building  fortresses  on  the  Swedish  fron- 
tier, and  providing  battleships.  Every  Norwegian 
boy  was  being  trained  with  a  view  to  an  armed 
struggle  with  the  Swedes,  and  taught  to  regard  them 
with  revengeful  feelings,  as  American  children  were 
long  taught  to  regard  the  English.  Nobel  was  a 
Swede  who  loved  his  country,  and  he  has  placed  the 
administration  of  his  other  bequests  in  Swedish 
hands.  He  entrusted  the  endowment  of  peace  and 
brotherhood  to  the  Norwegian  Storthing. 

Surely  no  more  magnanimous  appeal  than  this  has 
ever  been  addressed  by  a  man  to  men.  The  direc- 
tions of  such  a  Testator  ought  not  to  be  regarded 
lightly.  They  begin  to  assume  the  character  of  a 
sacred  text. 

II 

What  was  the  wish  of  Nobel's  mind  when,  in  lan- 
guage destined  to  immortality,  he  drew  up  the 
Fourth  Bequest? — 

"  One  share  to  the  person  who  shall  have  produced 


14  The  New  Word 

In  the  field  of  Literature  the  most  remarkable  work 
of  an  idealistic  tendency?" 

There  is  hardly  any  class  which  gives  so  much  to 
humanity,  and  receives  so  little  in  return,  as  the 
class  of  men  of  letters.  There  is  hardly  any  class 
whose  sufferings  are  greater;  and  there  is  none  which 
philanthropy  has  done  so  little  to  relieve. 

The  works  of  Homer  have  been  an  unfailing  spring 
of  noble  pleasure  for  three  thousand  years,  and  dur- 
ing all  that  time  humanity  has  repeated  with  more 
complacency  than  shame  the  story  of  the  poet  begging 
his  bread,  and  has  warned  its  children  to  shun  the 
literary  career.  The  dreadful  death  of  Chatterton 
seems  never  to  have  roused  a  momentary  pity  in 
any  philanthropist.  Had  that  boy  been  tlind,  or 
dumb,  or  idiotic,  or  incurably  diseased,  how  many 
benevolent  hearts  would  have  yearned  over  him! 
How  many  luxurious  homes,  standing  In  stately 
gardens  amid  glorious  scenery,  would  have  opened 
their  doors  to  take  him  in !  On  his  behalf  the 
preachers  would  have  preached,  and  the  purse-proud 
would  have  loosed  their  purse-strings.  But  because, 
instead  of  being  blind,  he  saw  too  well,  saw  the 
beauty  and  the  wonder  of  the  world,  and  would 
have  told  of  them,  philanthropy  turned  Its  back  on 
him,  and  humanity  would  not  suffer  him  to  live. 

Poe,  himself  the  most  gifted  and  the  most  wretched 
of  his  kind,  has  declared  that  the  laudation  of  the 
unworthy  is  to  the  worthy  the  bitterest  of  all  wrong. 


The  Riddle  15 

But  what,  then,  of  the  rewards  of  the  unworthy? 
and  the  rewards  of  literature  are  too  often  In  Inverse 
ratio  to  Its  worth.  The  author  of  a  successful  farce 
destined  to  three  or  four  years'  life  could  afford  to 
look  down  on  the  Nobel  prize.  The  writer  who 
faithfully  reflects  every  prejudice  In  the  public  mind 
can  never  stand  In  need  of  charity.  But  what  of 
Dante  and  Milton,  of  Villon  and  Verlaine? 

The  man  of  genius,  above  all  the  man  of  original 
genius,  must  generally  look  for  bread  to  some  other 
pursuit  than  his  own.  The  exceptions  are  those  whom 
robust  health,  or  some  strong  talent  auxiliary  to 
their  Inspiration,  has  enabled  to  overcome  the  public 
prejudice  of  their  own  day.  And  too  often  the  vic- 
tory has  been  won  at  some  cost  to  the  abiding  value 
of  their  work.  Happy  Is  he  who,  like  Spinoza,  has 
been  able  to  make  out  a  livelihood  by  grinding  lenses, 
instead  of  demeaning  himself  to  the  tasks  that 
humanity  offers  him  through  Its  agents  the  book- 
sellers and  editors.  Unhappy,  who  must  echo  the 
mournful  cry  of  Shakespeare — 

"  My  nature  is  subdued 
To  what  it  works  in,  like  the  dyer's  hand." 

And  yet  the  title  of  genius  to  protection  and  relief 
is  hardly  other  than  that  of  the  idiot,  the  epileptic 
and  the  paralytic.  Science  has  told  us  that  the 
lunatic,  the  poet  and  the  criminal  are  compact  of 
one  clay.  The  lives  of  the  poets  reveal  them  as 
sufferers  from  strange  infirmities  often  beyond  the 


1 6  The  New  Word 

reach  of  medical  lore.  The  most  precious  posses- 
sions of  literature  are  verily  pearls,  the  glorious  dis- 
guisement  of  some  inward  sore. 

Literature  is  the  chief  ornament  of  humanity;  and 
perhaps  humanity  never  shows  itself  uglier  than  when 
it  stands  with  the  pearl  shining  on  its  forehead,  and 
the  pearl-maker  crushed  beneath  Its  heel. 

There  is  in  England  a  thing  called  a  Royal  Lit- 
erary Fund,  for  the  pretended  purpose  of  showing 
charity  to  men  of  letters.  By  the  published  rules  of 
this  institution  its  alms  are  only  to  be  bestowed  on 
those  whose  lives  and  writings  are  alike  free  from 
reproach  on  the  score  of  religion  and  morality. 
What  a  clause  for  the  charter  of  a  hospital!  It  is 
evident  that  those  responsible  for  this  public  insult 
to  literature  are  inspired,  not  by  compassion  for 
genius,  but  by  fear  and  hatred  of  genius.  They  know 
well  that  it  is  as  hard  for  a  great  poet  to  be  a  regular 
churchgoer  and  a  respectable  father  of  a  family,  as 
it  is  for  themselves  to  write  a  great  poem.  Their 
true  object  is  to  give  alms  in  the  name  of  literature 
to  the  enemies  of  literature.  And  so  they  have  built 
an  asylum  for  well-behaved  dunces,  and  have  written 
over  the  door:  " No  admittance  for  Shakespeare  and 
Goethe." 

Ill 

If  Nobel  had  only  made  a  bequest  to  literature,  he 
would  have  done  a  brave  thing.  As  It  is,  he  has  done 
a  far  braver. 


The  Riddle  17 

The  word  Literature  is  not  an  exact  term,  because 
literature  is  not  an  exact  art.  It  is  a  term  wide 
enough  to  cover  every  kind  of  communication  by 
means  of  words,  from  the  Song  of  Songs  to  the  least 
newspaper  advertisement.  Nobel  has  manifestly  used 
the  word  in  a  broad  sense.  He  was  not  thinking  of 
literature  from  the  literary  standpoint,  nor  has  he 
laid  the  stress  upon  artistic  merit.  Instead  of  offering 
this  prize  for  the  best  work  of  literature,  he  has 
offered  it  for  the  best  work  of  idealism,  coming 
within  the  field  of  literature. 

That  such  is  his  intention  seems  to  be  fully  recog- 
nised by  a  provision  in  the  statutes  drawn  up  since 
the  Testator's  death  to  govern  his  Trustees: — 

"The  term  'literature',  used  in  the  Will,  shall  be 
understood  to  embrace  not  only  works  falling  under 
the  category  of  Polite  Literature,  but  also  other 
writings  which  may  claim  to  possess  literary  merit 
by  reason  of  their  form  or  their  mode  of  exposition." 

The  spirit  which  breathes  in  this  bequest  is  the 
same  which  breathes  in  the  others.  The  Testator 
has  kept  one  end  steadily  in  sight,  the  increase  of 
human  happiness.  His  method  is  to  encourage  those 
whose  work  is,  in  his  opinion,  most  beneficial  to 
mankind,  the  work  of  the  inventor,  the  work  of  the 
idealist,  the  work  of  the  peacemaker. 

In  this  bequest  the  word  idealist  is  mightier  than 
the  word  literature,  and  must  prevail  over  it.  This 
is  not  an  endowment  of  the  author,  but  of  some  one 
greater  than  the  author. 


The  New.  Word 


IV 


Nobel  died,  and  the  publication  of  his  Will  brought 
about  a  significant  discovery.  No  one  could  tell  the 
meaning  of  the  word  idealist,  or  idealistic. 

The  history  of  the  world  is  glanced  at  in  the  fol- 
lowing inquiry.  Here  it  will  be  enough  to  say  that 
while  It  was  in  use  in  all  the  leading  languages  of 
Europe  In  the  Testator's  lifetime,  his  Will  revealed 
it  as  a  riddle. 

In  what  astonishing  senses  the  Testator's  word 
was  understood  appears  from  the  list  of  the  explana- 
tions given  me  by  educated  men  in  various  walks  of 
life,  soon  after  I  had  launched  in  this  investigation. 

"  Something  to  do  with  the  imaginative  powers." 

"  Fanatical." 

"Altruistic." 

"  Not  practical." 

"Exact." 

"  Poetical." 

"  Intangible." 

"  Sentimental." 

"True." 

"That  which  cannot  be  proved." 

"  The  opposite  to  materialistic.'* 


The  Riddle  19 


The  mood  of  humanity  towards  the  poet  is  that 
of  the  schoolboy  towards  the  butterfly — without  pity 
but  without  malice.  Towards  the  prophet  It  Is  that 
of  the  spoilt  child  towards  the  physician — one  of 
angry  resistance. 

There  Is  no  more  pitiful  sight  than  this;  mankind 
suffers  under  no  such  curse;  It  Is  the  tragedy  of  the 
world,  the  stoning  of  the  messenger  of  good  tidings. 
*'  Ye  build  the  sepulchres  of  the  prophets,  and  your 
fathers  killed  them,"  Alas!  it  is  in  sacrifice  to  the 
dead  prophet  that  the  living  prophet  is  offered  up. 

There  Is  no  Instinct  much  more  deeply  rooted  in 
the  heart  of  man  than  this  old  cannibal  one  that  the 
suffering  of  the  best  man  is  for  the  benefit  of  man- 
kind. "  I  exiled  Dante,"  exults  proud  Florence,  *'  and 
lo !  the  Divine  Comedy."  "  I  hounded  forth  Mo- 
hammed," boasts  Mecca,  "  and  here  is  Islam."  It 
needs  a  DIagoras  to  ask  where  are  the  votive  offer- 
ings of  those  who  were  wrecked.  It  takes  a  Nobel 
to  discern  the  difference  to  mankind  between  the 
labours  of  Hercules  and  the  agony  of  the  Merlah. 

The  instinct  of  hatred  is  stronger  than  reason.  It 
is  not  to  be  baffled  by  etymologies.  Whate^xr  the 
uncertainty  belonging  to  the  Testator's  language,  his 
fourth  bequest  was  taken  very  differently  from  the 
remainder  of  the  Will.  It  drew  to  Itself  the  prompt 
hostlhty  of  the  two  great  schools  of  thought  which 


20  The  New  Word 

divide  between  them  the  Intellectual  government  of 
the  world.  Pharisee  'and  Sadducee  both  scented 
danger  in  the  unknown  word.  Both  felt  themselves 
threatened  by  something  more  formidable  than  a 
literary  competition. 

The  antagonism  of  both  was  summed  up  In  the 
scornful  criticism  that  Nobel  had  offered  a  prize  for 
a  new  religion.  Nobel  himself  was  branded  as  a 
dreamer.  There  were  those  ready  to  insinuate  that 
he  had  not  been  in  his  right  mind. 

In  the  present  age  more  than  a  hundred  millions 
are  paid  every  year  for  the  repetition  of  old  texts; 
in  England  alone  there  are  several  custodians  of 
prophecy  who  each  receive  every  year  a  sum  greater 
than  that  here  proposed  as  the  life's  wage  of  the 
prophet.  Nobel  wished  to  give  eight  thousand 
pounds  a  year  among  the  writers  of  new  texts.  That 
was  his  dream.  His  madness  lay  there.  Humanity 
is  not  mad  to  spend  one  hundred  millions  a  year  on 
phonographs.  Nobel  was  mad  to  offer  these  few 
thousands  for  a  living  voice. 

VI 

On  the  whole  the  feeling  aroused  most  by  this 
bequest  was  incredulity.  It  was  regarded  as  a  chal- 
lenge to  materialism,  a  word  not  really  better  under- 
stood than  idealism,  but  taken  to  signify  the  spirit 
of  modern  science,  triumphant  in  so  many  depart- 
ments of  life. 


The  Riddle  21 

And  In  these  days  material  science  is  very  great, 
so  that  the  very  word  Idealist  is  in  some  discredit. 
There  Is  an  opinion  abroad  that  while  Idealism  has 
been  talking,  Materialism  has  been  doing.  Mater- 
ialist science  has  conferred  endless  benefits  on  man- 
kind. It  has  given  us  new  medicines  and  tools  and 
carriages,  and  all  manner  of  useful  and  pleasant 
things.  It  has  opened  up  the  history  of  the  world 
and  man,  and  bidden  him  recast  all  his  beliefs  and 
habits.  Inch  by  Inch  It  has  invaded  every  province 
of  human  knowledge;  and  now  It  is  carrying  the  war 
into  the  very  citadel  of  Idealism.,  and  beginning  to 
measure  nerv^es  and  brain  cells  instead  of  arguing 
about  mind. 

Now  this  bequest  does  indeed  come  as  a  challenge, 
but  not  to  those  very  materialists  to  whom  the  Testa- 
tor has  given  the  chief  place  among  his  legatees. 
The  challenge  Is  a  challenge  to  the  Idealists,  to  show 
that  they  also  are  contributing  to  benefit  mankind. 

Because  of  that  it  marks  an  era  In  the  history  of 
philosophy.  Three  hundred  years  ago  a  challenge 
was  addressed  by  Bacon  to  the  physical  sciences, 
under  the  name  of  natural  philosophy.  His  famous 
substitution  of  inductive  for  deductive  reasoning 
amounted  to  no  more  than  this  advice:  Learn  from 
the  things  themselves,  Instead  of  from  the  words 
about  the  things.  But  In  asking  for  fruits  he  pro- 
posed to  the  philosopher  the  same  end  that  Nobel 
has  proposed — the  benefit  of  mankind. 

It  is  since  that  date  that  the  physical  sciences  have 


22  The  New  Word 

arisen  out  of  their  sleep  and  marched  to  victory. 
Height  after  height  has  been  scaled,  and  all  the  glory 
of  creation  has  burst  on  our  eyes.  But  still  our 
eyes  remain  dim  eyes.  The  march  of  reason  has 
not  kept  pace  with  that  of  knowledge.  Men  stand 
before  the  wonders  of  the  scientific  revelation  as  they 
formerly  stood  before  the  sculptured  stones  of  Egypt, 
unable  to  decipher  them,  and  half  afraid  to  try. 

Nobel,  it  seems,  has  hoped  for  a  Champollion.  He 
has  asked  for  interpretations.  Like  the  Babylonian 
king  of  old,  he  has  sent  for  the  magicians  and  the 
astrologers,  the  Chaldeans  and  the  soothsayers,  and 
has  bidden  them  expound  anew  the  meaning  of  that 
dream  which  is  called  Life. 

For  thousands  of  years  the  metaphysicians  and 
moral  philosophers,  the  theologians  and  logicians, 
have  been  muttering  the  words  of  their  mystery  in 
corners, — now  at  last  a  brave  man  has  flung  down 
this  bag  of  gold  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  has  said : 
Let  us  see  what  it  all  really  comes  to.  Let  us  see  if 
you  can  help  men  to  live. 


VII 


In  the  field  of  Literature  the  academy  and  the 
idealist  meet  as  natural  foes.  The  academy  Is,  by 
its  constitution,  the  judge  of  literature,  and  not  of 
truth.  The  idealist  Is  only  a  man  of  letters  by  acci- 
dent— there  are  no  accidents  I — by  necessity.    Of  the 


The  Riddle  23 

very  greatest  teachers  of  mankind,  only  two  are 
known  to  have  written  anything,  and  only  of  Moham- 
med can  it  be  said  that  his  book  affords  any  measure 
of  himself.  To  the  perfect  Idealist,  Lao,  is  attributed 
the  saying — "Those  who  know  do  not  tell;  those 
who  tell  do  not  know." 

When  the  idealist  enters  the  field  of  Literature  he 
does  so  from  the  opposite  side  to  that  of  the  academy. 
For  him  the  spirit  is  everything,  for  the  academy  the 
form  is  everything.  It  would  seem  easier  for  the 
rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven  than  for  the 
idealist  to  find  grace  with  the  academy.  Yet  the 
Testator  has  placed  this  endowment  in  the  hands  of 
the  illustrious  body  styled  the  Swedish  Academy. 

In  doing  so  he  has  shown  himself  not  less  inspired 
than  in  the  rest  of  the  Will.  For  he  is  not  concerned 
with  idealism  as  an  end,  but  as  a  means.  The  end 
is  still  the  benefit  of  mankind.  To  this  end  the 
idealist  is  called  upon  to  choose  speech  rather  than 
silence.  When  he  speaks,  he  Is  to  be  judged  by  his 
words. 

Had  the  Testator  done  otherwise,  had  he  directed 
that  the  idealist  was  to  be  judged  by  his  ideals,  he 
would  have  done  what  he  has  been  Ignorantly  accused 
of  doing;  he  would  have  founded  a  new  Catholic 
Church.  As  it  is,  he  has  founded  a  Forum.  By 
giving  the  prize  to  eloquence  and  not  to  truth,  he 
has  done  what  is  best  for  the  idealist,  and  best  for 
mankind,  and  in  the  long  run  best  for  truth.  He  has 
secured  the  freedom  of  thought  by  the  bondage  of 


24  The  New  Word 

expression.  This  golden  fetter  is  placed  on  the  right 
foot. 

At  the  same  time  he  has  given  back  to  literature 
by  the  word  "  markUg "  all  that  is  taken  from  it  by 
the  words  "  idealist  tendency."  I  cannot  render  it 
by  the  official  translator's  word  "  distinguished,"  be- 
cause that  has  now  become  cant.  By  a  distinguished 
man,  we  mean  a  man  who  has  distinguished  himself 
in  a  frock  coat  and  tall  hat  and  kid  gloves ;  by  a  dis- 
tinguished writer  one  who  has  daintily  picked  his 
words  out  of  a  dictionary  of  synonyms,  and  made  a 
delicate  mosaic,  rather  than  one  In  whose  mind  strong 
emotion  has  melted  the  element  of  language  and 
cast  down  the  diam.ond  of  literature. 

What  the  Testator  has  asked  for  is  the  most 
glorious  work. 

VIII 

Nobel  was  an  idealist  who  was  not  a  man  of 
letters.  The  great  subtlety  with  which  this  Will  is 
drawn  is  not  that  of  the  grammarian  or  the  lawyer, 
but  that  of  a  sincere  mind  thoroughly  possessed  of 
its  purpose,  and  wresting  words  to  that  purpose. 
Has  he  not  given  this  very  legacy  to  the  "idealist" 
who  shall  contribute  most  "materially"  to  benefit 
mankind? 

The  words  of  such  a  Testator  must  be  approached 
in  the  spirit  in  which  lawyers  pretend  to  approach 
all  testaments.    The  object  must  be  not  to  explain 


The  Riddle  25 

the  words  by  themselves,  but  to  gather  from  them 
what  the  Testator  wished  to  be  done. 

It  is  in  that  spirit  that  I  have  tried  to  shape  the 
following  inquiry.  The  question  I  have  asked  myself 
is  not,  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  Idealist,  but, 
what  did  the  Testator  mean  by  it? 

How  I  was  tempted  to  undertake  the  task  is  here 
beside  the  question.  I  need  only  say  that  I  began 
it  just  after  the  official  publication  of  the  Will,  in 
the  year  1901,  and  when  it  was  the  subject  of  discus- 
sion as  a  matter  of  public  interest.  It  is  as  a  member 
of  the  public,  of  that  great  Public  designated  by  the 
Testator,  under  the  name  of  mankind,  as  his  ultimate 
heirs,  that  I  am  interested  in  this  Will,  and  that,  no 
one  else  coming  forward,  I  have  been  bold  to  vindi- 
cate it. 

The  six  years  that  have  elapsed  since  that  time  have 
not  materially  changed  the  situation.  Striking  works 
of  an  idealist  tendency  are  not  being  written  at  the 
rate  of  one  every  year,  or,  if  they  are,  they  have  not 
been  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  Trustees  of  this 
bequest.  In  the  dearth  of  such  works  the  Trustees 
have  done  doubtless  what  the  Testator  might  have 
consented  to,  if  not  what  he  has  directed,  in  awarding 
this  Priz'C  as  a  testimonial  to  distinguished  men  of 
letters,  at  the  close  of  their  careers.  But  inasmuch 
as  they  have  framed  no  authoritative  interpretation 
of  the  governing  word  in  the  bequest,  they  seem  to 
be  in  the  position  of  a  Court  which  has  not  yet  de- 
livered judgment,  and  therefore  may  be  addressed 


26  The  New  Word 

without  impertinence  by  any  counsel  interested  in 
the  case.* 

I  lay  these  imperfect  suggestions  before  the  public 
in  the  hope  that  they  may  be  found  of  some  interest, 
apart  from  their  exciting  cause;  and  in  the  further 
hope  that,  if  they  do  not  increase,  at  any  rate  they 
cannot  lessen,  the  public  gratitude  for  a  high  and 
unique  example  of  benevolence. 

For  addressing  them  more  directly  to  the  illustrious 
body  charged  with  the  execution  of  the  Trust  I  have 
no  real  excuse  except  that  there  would  have  been  a 
certain  affectation  in  doing  otherwise. 

I  make  no  claim  to  speak  as  an  idealist.  I  am  a 
scientist,  and  my  science  is  ontology,  commonly  called 
truth : — now  this  bequest  is  not  in  favour  of  works 
of  a  true  tendency,  nor  even  of  the  truest  works  of 
an  idealist  tendency.  Nevertheless,  I  think,  perhaps, 
that  Nobel  might  have  pardoned  what  I  do,  and  let 
me  lay  this  little  essay  in  interpretation  as  a  wreath 
upon  his  tomb. 

•  See  introductory  note. 


SECOND    HEAD 


THE  PERSONAL  EQUATION 

Descartes  and  the  Sor bonne. — i.  Useless  Literature. — 
2. — A  Personal  Explanation. — 3.  The  Blockade  of  the 
Schoolmasters. — 4.  Scientific  Philosophy. — 5.  Truth  and 
Verihood. — 6.     The  White  Mind. 

A  S  the  astronomer,  in  order  to  tell  fairly  the  time 
kept  by  a  star  in  heaven,  must  first  record  the 
time  taken  by  his  own  thought,  and  thereby  correct 
his  reckoning;  and  as  Descartes  did  not  deem  it 
beside  the  purpose  to  tell  the  Sorbonne  that  he  was  in 
his  dressing-gown  when  he  sat  down  to  prove  the 
existence  of  God;  so  it  will  not  be  vain  for  me  to 
describe  with  what  bias  I  approached  my  present 
task. 


An  eloquent  writer  upon  Art,  in  a  work  called 
The  Seven  Lamps  of  Architecture,  has  chosen  Truth 
to  be  his  second  Lamp,  and  -thereby  shown  that  it 
was  not  his  first  wish  to  tell  the  truth  about  archi- 
tecture. Accordingly  it  is  no  surprise  to  see  him  begin 
by  defining  architecture  as  useless  building,  and  end, 
in  a  preface  written  long  afterwards,  by  complaining 

27 


28  The  New.  Word 

that  this  very  book  had  proved  useless  for  its  pur- 
pose. For  if  architecture  be  useless  building, 
literature  must  be  useless  writing.  It  is  significant, 
and  it  will  not  be  found  beside  the  question,  that 
neither  in  this  book,  nor  in  other  books  treating  of 
Gothic  architecture,  is  there  the  least  allusion  to  the 
architecture  of  the  Goths.  The  origin  of  the  Gothic 
church,  like  the  origin  of  everything  else  in  Europe, 
has  been  sought  on  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean 
Sea.  No  one  has  asked  why  the  Italian  masons,  when 
they  crossed  the  Alps,  as  they  are  still  crossing  them 
to-day,  in  search  of  work,  left  off  building  like  the 
Romans,  and  began  building  otherwise.  No  one 
seems  to  know  that  the  Gothic  church,  in  its  essential 
features,  features  that  have  been  copied  in  St.  Peter's, 
is  a  copy  of  the  Gothic  hall  as  it  was  built  in  Iceland 
in  the  days  of  Charlemagne,  and  as  it  was  built  in 
Gothland  in  the  days  of  Herod. 

To  say  that  truth  had  been  my  first  lamp  in  this 
inquiry  would  be  only  to  say  that  I  was  a  Gothic 
writer,  or,  as  men  write  it  In  my  native  land,  a 
Jute.  I  have  approached  the  word  Idealist  in  the 
spirit  of  a  Goth  seeking  to  understand  a  Mediter- 
ranean word.  I  have  approached  it  in  the  spirit  of 
a  child  seeking  to  understand  a  schoolmaster's  word. 
I  have  been  like  a  sleeper,  waking  out  of  an  enchanted 
sleep,  and  seeking  to  understand  an  enchanter's  word. 

My  first,  and,  to  the  best  of  my  endeavour,  my 
only,  light  In  this  inquiry  has  been  the  light  of  veri- 
hood. 


Psychology :  The  Personal  Equation        29 


II 


The  foreword  of  this  Letter  was  really  written 
thirty  years  ago,  when  a  mere  schoolboy,  hardly 
knowing  what  he  did,  chose  Truth  as  being  for  him 
the  one  sacred  Name.  Afterwards,  when  I  had  read 
the  book  in  which  Darwin  reminded  us  clearly  of  a 
fact  dimly  familiar  to  our  forefathers,  I  laid  it  down 
with  the  reflection  that  most  other  books  would  have 
to  be  re-written  in  the  light  of  that  forgotten  fact.' — 
The  question  v>^as  how  to  begin. 

I  spent  the  next  twenty  years  In  exploring  the 
human  mind  as  It  Is  revealed  in  literature,  and  as  it  is 
revealed  In  life.  I  have  not  passed  the  time  shut  up 
in  libraries.  I  have  been  a  speaker  and  a  writer; 
I  have  been  a  lawyer  and  a  soldier;  I  have  been  a 
ruler  and  a  judge.  I  have  taught  children,  and  learned 
from  them.  I  have  talked  with  the  learned  in  their 
colleges,  and  talked  with  the  Black  men  in  their 
own  land  beside  the  Black  River,  in  the  oldest  and 
most  catholic  speech,  the  language  of  Signs.  In  a 
place  where  no  White  man  had  been  before  me,  I 
found  a  Black  king  and  his  folk  withheld  by  an  old 
curse  from  planting  a  medicinal  tree;  and  I  broke 
the  curse  by  showing  to  them  a  stone  whereon  a 
Greek  of  long  ago  had  carved  the  figure  of  his  God. 
— In  such  ways  I  have  learned  somewhat  of  the 
nature  of  words. 

At  the  same  time  I  have  learned  somewhat  of  the 


30  The  New  Word 

feelings  that  words  express,  and  found  the  same 
feeling  underlying  many  different  words;  as  if  all 
men,  in  all  ages,  and  In  all  lands,  were  trying  to  say 
much  the  same  thing.  And  hardly  knowing  whether 
I  had  found  anything  worth  saying,  nor  how  far  the 
words  that  were  right  for  me  would  be  right  for 
others,  I  doubted  whether  I  should  speak. 

In  our  time  there  are  many  honourable  men  and 
women  who  share  my  doubt.  They  have  been  put 
to  sleep  in  childhood  with  certain  words,  most  true 
and  beautiful  to  those  who  spoke  them  first;  and 
they  have  awakened  out  of  that  sleep  with  great  pain, 
and  as  those  who  are  bereft  of  hope.  Now  such  a 
man  as  I  speak  of,  a  Materialist,  came  to  me  one  day, 
and  told  me  he  had  been  consulted  by  a  mother, 
who  was  also  a  Materialist,  about  the  education  of 
her  child,  a  child  who  will  one  day  occupy  a  great 
place  in  the  world,  and  influence  the  lives  of  many 
other  children.  And,  both  being  Materialists,  he  had 
given  her  the  advice,  and  she  had  taken  It,  that  the 
child's  mind  should  be  put  to  sleep  by  the  words 
which  they  themselves  both  believed  to  be  untrue. 

The  following  day  I  found  in  the  organ  of  my 
trades-union  as  an  author  the  announcement  of 
Nobel's  Testament. 

On  reading  the  Fourth  Bequest  my  first  reflection 
was  the  sad  one  that  such  a  Trust  was  not  likely  to 
be  carried  out.  Then  I  asked  myself  why?  What 
books  did  the  Testator  wish  to  be  written ;  why  were 
they  not  being  written;  and  why,  if  they  should  be 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation        31 

written,  must  they  nevertheless  fail  of  their  reward? 
The  answer  seemed  to  lie  in  the  meaning  of  the  word 
Idealist. — What  was  its  meaning?  or  rather  what 
was  its  meaning  for  other  minds  than  my  own? — 
I  turned  to  the  dictionary;  what  I  found  led  me 
further;  I  began  to  make  notes,  and  presently  saw 
they  were  the  book  I  had  waited  for  so  long  to 
begin. 

The  natural  shape  of  this  inquiry,  therefore,  is 
that  of  a  train  of  thought,  and  I  have  not  striven  to 
give  it  any  other.  As,  when  the  chemical  salts  are 
held  in  solution  in  the  glass,  the  introduction  of  some 
foreign  body  will  cause  them  to  encircle  it  with  crys- 
tals, so  have  the  floating  thoughts  of  half  a  lifetime 
come  together  in  answer  to  a  single  question,  and 
settled  Into  shape. 

Ill 

Literature,  from  the  lyric's  pure  cry  of  pain  or  joy 
down  to  the  pill-seller's  advertisement,  is  a  com- 
munication. There  Is  a  personal  equation  of  the 
reader  as  well  as  of  the  writer,  and  the  fairest  lan- 
guage is  a  bargain  between  two  minds.  The  coun- 
sel's speech  to  the  jury  is  not  as  his  speech  to  the 
judge.  The  greatest  of  playwrights  has  written  for 
the  gallery  as  well  as  for  the  boxes. 

It  Is  the  second  equation  in  which  the  difficulty 
lies.  It  Is  that  equation  the  thought  of  which  caused 
the  perfect  Idealist  to  condemn  speech.  It  Is  that 
which  stands  in  the  way  of  Nobel's  Fourth  Bequest. 


32  The  New  Word 

My  gallery  is  a  gallery  of  judges ;  by  which  I  mean 
that  I  speak  in  the  hearing  of  those  with  whom  I  am 
called  on  to  quarrel,  whose  minds  are  so  much  fixed 
on  their  own  study  as  to  be  unable  to  think  freely 
about  that  or  any  other.  The  ontologist  claims  all 
the  provinces  of  knowledge  as  his  fatherland,  and 
he  is  treated  as  a  trespasser  in  each.  On  every 
frontier  the  specialist  with  his  fixed  bayonet  keeps 
watch  and  ward,  as  though  he  dreaded  to  give  or 
to  receive.  The  free  trader  in  knowledge  bears  the 
smuggler's  brand.  But  it  once  made  my  holiday  to 
take  food  through  the  midst  of  six  great  navies  to 
starving  men  on  a  Mediterranean  isle;  and  shall  I 
now  fear  to  run  the  blockade  of  the  schoolmasters, 
if  I  believe  they  are  keeping  children,  from  the  bread 
of  life? 

The  man  of  letters  will  need  no  explanation  of 
why  I  have  found  the  dogma  of  philology  to  be  the 
devil's  leading  counsel  in  this  debate.  To  the  philol- 
ogist, whose  history — for  I  cannot  yet  call  it  science 
— has  helped  and  hindered  me  by  turns,  I  owe  an 
honourable  salute  before  the  foils  are  crossed. 

The  sciences  fall  roughly  into  two  groups,  accord- 
ing to  whether  they  come  before  or  after  man.  The 
human  sciences  begin  with  folk-lore,  and  Darwin's 
book  has  given  them  a  natural  starting-point.  The 
anthropologist  holds  the  key  to  the  position,  and 
without  his  light  all  other  students  of  the  arts  of  man 
are  wandering  at  random  in  the  dark,  and  letting 
themselves  be  thwarted  needlessly. 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation        33 

In  his  broad-minded  treatise  on  the  Kalevala, 
Comparetti  has  brought  together  much  learning  to 
elucidate  the  name  and  nature  of  the  Sampa,  the 
mystic  lucky-box  whose  making  and  carrying  off  are 
main  links  in  the  poem.  But  the  Sampa  contains  no 
puzzle  for  the  folk-learner.  There  is  just  such  a 
lucky-box  in  every  West  African  hut.  The  serious- 
minded  Black  would  no  more  think  of  setting  up 
house  without  it  than  the  Christian  without  his 
family  Bible,  or  the  scientist  without  his  drain.  You 
can  buy  a  Sampa  at  any  wizard's  for  a  few  cowrie- 
shells.  The  wizard  makes  it  while  you  wait.  He 
takes  a  bit  of  clay,  and  a  feather,  and  a  twig  of  straw, 
and  whatever  else  strikes  his  fancy,  and  sticks  them 
together  in  a  calabash;  and  the  householder  puts  it 
in  his  house  to  conjure  away  the  spirits  of  misfortune 
and  disease — one  of  whom  science  has  now  identified 
with  the  anopheles  mosquito.  That  is  the  Sampa, 
and  it  is  a  prayer,  written  in  the  old  magic  letters 
which  the  spirits,  or  the  mosquitoes,  are  most  likely 
to  understand;  a  language  in  which  the  wizard  is  a 
specialist, — and  the  philologist  not  even  a  smatterer. 

Philology  needs  the  light  of  folklore  more  than 
any  other  study  needs  it,  because  words  are  the 
most  elusive  work  of  man.  They  are  the  birds  and 
butterflies  of.  man's  creation,  and  the  philologist 
shows  his  love  for  tliem  by  trying  to  transfix  them 
on  Grimm's  pin;  by  tearing  them  out  of  the  sky 
with  his  Aryan  shotgun,  and  giving  them  glass  beads 
for  eyes,  and  souls  of  cotton-wool.    He  is  bitten  by 


34  The  New  Word 

the  mania  for  exactness,  and  his  study  is  the  one 
study  in  which  exactness  must  almost  certainly  be 
wrong.  When  he  rules  out  the  guesses  of  the  un- 
trained mind,  he  is  ruling  out  the  mind  that  shaped 
those  very  words  of  his;  he  is  contemning  what  ought 
to  be  his  fundamental  law. 

The  wild  man's  mind  ran  wild,  and  it  was  volatile 
to  catch  the  most  fanciful  resemblances  between 
words,  as  his  tongue  was  volatile  to  rhyme  their 
sounds.  His  words  were  spelt,  like  Mr.  Weller's 
name,  according  to  the  taste  and  fancy  of  the  speller. 
The  Athenian  crowd  that  checked  Demosthenes  for 
a  wrong  accent  was  no  more  like  the  group  before  a 
Tartar  tent  that  hung  upon  the  earliest  Tale  of  Troy 
than  a  first-night  audience  in  a  London  theatre  is 
like  the  ring  of  naked  Blacks  who  look  on  at  their 
native  pantomime  in  the  Australian  scrub. 

I  am  now  interpreting  a  Will,  and  not  writing  an 
encyclopedia;  though  I  should  like  to  persuade  some 
living  Nobel  to  organise  the  writing  of  an  encyclo- 
pasdia  on  scientific  lines,  to  replace  the  alphabetical 
chaos  on  the  shelves  of  the  Free  Library;  one  who 
would  recognise,  as  this  Will  recognises,  that  the 
books  are  more  important  than  the  shelves,  and  the 
Librarian  more  important  than  the  Library.  Here 
I  can  only  so  far  suggest  scientific  canons  of  philol- 
ogy as  to  justify  the  interpretation  that  follows,  and 
to  show  that  what  otherwise  might  seem  my  careless 
handling  of  words  is  founded  on  greater  care. 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation        35 


IV 


If  we  should  judge  the  mind  of  Europe  by  the 
work  In  various  fields  of  learners  like  Retzlus  and 
SergI  and  Massey  and  Montellus,  we  should  think  It 
had  recovered  from  that  disease  of  word-lore  re- 
membered as  the  Aryan  Myth.  But  all  philologists 
have  by  no  means  recovered.  I  have  before  me  the 
latest  and  best  work  on  English  etymologies;  and 
Professor  Skeat  must  be  the  whipplng-boy  of  worser 
men. 

By  way  of  groundwork  he  has  a  list  of  imaginary 
Aryan  roots,  as  though  the  Ar^'ans  were  a  historic 
nation,  dwelling  in  some  country  called  Aryana, 
whose  literary  remains  were  before  him.  That  Is 
not  so,  and  the  buried  cities  of  Bokhara,  perhaps, 
hold  many  surprises  In  store  for  the  philologist.  But 
even  if  It  were  so',  Aryan  would  not  be  the  last  word 
on  English  etymology.  These  roots  were  Invented 
by  men  who  had  not  read  Darwin,  or,  like  Max 
Miiller,  did  not  believe  in  him;  and  If  they  are  any- 
thing but  fancies,  they  are  not  roots  but  stems  cut 
off  from  their  roots.  The  study  of  words  from 
such  a  beginning  is  no  more  scientific  than  a  young 
lady's  album  of  dried  leaves  Is  scientific  botany. 
There  are  only  two  sound  starting-points  for  the 
history  of  a  word ;  one  is  where  the  word  itself  begins, 
in  the  wild  man's  cry,  or  the  technical  coinage  which 
is  manifest  In  Nobel's  dynamite;  the  other  is  where 


36  The  New  Word 

our  knowledge  of  it  begins,  in  the  dead  manuscript 
and  in  the  living  mouth.  The  first  starting-point  is 
the  philologist's,  the  second  is  the  lexicographer's. 
The  imaginary  Aryan  stem  is  a  mere  generalisation 
of  comparative  lexicography. 

Not  only  has  the  author  ignored  anthropology,  but 
he  has  ignored  geology,  geography  and  history.  He 
has  Ignored  the  Ice-Cap,  and  with  it  the  fact  that 
Europe  must  have  been  colonised  from  Africa  long 
before  it  was  conquered  from  Asia  (if  it  was  con- 
quered). The  Black  man  crossed  the  strait  of 
Gibraltar,  If  even  there  were  a  strait,  in  his  canoe, 
ages  before  the  White  man  drove  his  wagon  across 
the  snow-bound  steppes  of  Russia.  The  English 
language  has  more  sources  than  the  English  philol- 
ogist has  dreamed  of.  Only  the  other  day  an 
astronomer,  measuring  Stonehenge  after  measuring 
the  Great  Pyramid,  learned  what  Massey  had  long 
before  learned  from  folk-lore,  that  Pharaoh  has  left 
his  mark  in  Britain. 

He  deals  with  words  as  though  they  were  all  under 
a  vow  of  celibacy,  like  the  monkish  writers  who 
have  done  so  much  to  disfigure  and  disguise  them. 
Whereas  one  half  of  English  words  are  in  their 
present  shape  the  offspring  of  Dutch  mothers  and 
Latin  fathers,  or  Latin  mothers  and  Dutch  fathers, 
whose  features  may  be  still  discerned  in  them;  to 
say  nothing  of  the  French  and  Scandinavian  strains. 

For  Instance,  the  remarkable  word  'very  or  werry 
— for  Mr.  Weller  followed  Piers  Plowman  In  spelling 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation        37 

It  with  two  rs — Is  labelled  as  being  the  French  vraif 
from  the  Low  Latin  veracus.  Whereas  vrai,  which 
the  Provencal  Mr.  Weller  spells  yverai,  as  I  have 
ascertained  on  the  spot,  has  no  more  to  do  with 
veracus  in  form  than  with  very  in  meaning.  This 
strong  word  which  stands  out  In  modern  French  like 
a  rock  against  the  tide  of  verite,  verifier,  veritable 
and  veridique,  emerging  from  the  monkish  effort  to 
write  It  verai,  as  a  rock  emerges  from  the  waves  Is, 
like  its  brother  vrac,  a  Franklsh  word,  and  its  Eng- 
lish and  Latin  representatives  are  (w)  right  and 
rectus.  (We  meet  it  letter  for  letter  in  the  English 
hewray,  and  catch  the  counter-sense  in  awry.)  The 
sense  underlying  it,  which  is  a  scientific  root,  is  the 
strength  of  the  wrist,  as  In  wringing  or  wreaking 
(Skeat  has  seen  that  the  brother  word  vrac  is 
wreck),  In  short  It  Is  the  strength  of  working.  The 
sense  underlying  verus  and  veracus,  and  the  Dutch 
waar,  and,  to  whatever  extent,  the  English  very,  Is 
the  strength  of  the  ear.  In  being  ware,  and  wary,  In 
short  it  Is  the  strength  of  hearing.  And  these  are 
not  Imaginary  Aryan  roots,  but  sensible  human  ones; 
and  if  they  do  not  please  the  philologist,  perhaps 
they  will  please  the  psychologist. 

The  common  term  of  vrai  and  verus,  I  suspect, 
Is  not  veracus  but  vir,  as  man  Is  the  common  term 
of  working  and  hearing.  And  that  Is  the  sense  which 
I  catch  faintly  breathing  in  very,  like  the  scent  of 
a  flower  lingering  in  a  jar. 

For  very  Is  not  an  adverb,  nor  an  adjective,  as 


38  The   New    Word 

Skeat  carelessly  reckons  it;  neither  does  it  mean 
"true"  and  "truly"  as  he  pretends,  to  support  his 
derivation  from  veracus.  We  cannot  say  that  a  man 
is  very,  nor  that  he  speaks  very.  It  is  an  intensitive 
particle,  unique  In  the  language,  and  serving  the 
office  of  a  declension  before  adverbs  and  adjectives. 
Such  a  word  must  have  a  complex  pedigree,  and  I 
tell  only  half  the  truth, in  saying  that  its  story  is 
the  story  of  vrai  inside  out.  For  just  as  vrai  is  a 
Prankish  word  which  has  absorbed  a  Roman  mean- 
ing, that  of  "true,"  so  very  has  accepted  a  partly 
Roman  spelling  while  preserving  an  Anglo-Saxon 
meaning.  -And  that  meaning  is  very  nearly  the 
original  one  of  vrm.  For  not  only  does  very  mean 
"right"  rather  than  "true"  or  "truly,"  as  may 
be  seen  at  a  glance  in  such  uses  as  "yours  very 
truly,"  "the  very  man  for  the  post"  and  "Very 
Reverend,"  but  it  has  displaced  "right"  in  those 
very  uses.  It  is,  however,  inferior  to  right  In 
strength,  as  the  dean  is  inferior  to  the  bishop;  and 
without  pretending  to  give  a  thorough  account  of 
it,  I  think  the  clue  may  be  found  In  Mr.  Weller's 
and  Piers  Plowman's  double  r,  and  that  It  may  be 
either  a  composition  or  a  confusion  of  waar  and 
right.  Verrey  suggests  to  my  ear  much  more  an 
imaginary  Latin  verrecttis,  than  any  Low  Latin 
veracus. 

The  English  philologist  has  not  got  beyond  the 
state  of  mind  of  the  Australian  Black,  who  has  not 
yet  found  out  the  father's  share  In  child-begetting, 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation        39 

and  believes  children  to  be  ancestral  spirits  who 
have  entered  the  mother's  womb  when  she  was  walk- 
ing past  a  grave.  He  has  not  got  so  far  as  the  Black, 
because  even  the  Black  sees  the  features  of  the  an- 
cestor in  the  child,  and  the  philologist  does  not  see 
the  Gothic  features  in  many  a  dog-latin  word  that 
has  crept  like  a  cuckoo  into  an  Anglo-Saxon  nest. 

He  has  accepted  with  childlike  trust  the  story  of 
the  monk  who,  writing  with  the  Book  of  Joshua  for 
his  model,  has  described  the  Angles  and  Saxons 
as  sweeping  over  the  island  like  a  swarm  of  locusts, 
and  leaving  no  British  man,  woman  or  child  alive 
to  be  their  thralls  or  wives.  And  that  was  not  so. 
The  Roman  chesters  did  not  all  go  down  like  Jericho, 
leaving  not  one  stone  upon  another,  as  soon  as  Hen- 
gist  landed  In  the  Isle  of  Thanet;  neither  did  all  the 
Welsh  flee  Into  Wales.  The  differences  between 
English  and  Swedish  are  some  of  them  Welsh  differ- 
ences and  Finnish  differences,  as  the  differences  be- 
tween Spanish  and  Italian  are  Iberian  differences. 

The  philologist  seems  never  to  have  heard  any  one 
speaking  English,  but  to  believe  that  his  own  learned 
dialect  is  the  speech  used  in  the  nursery  and  on  the 
farmstead.  And  that  is  not  so.  What  Skeat  rarely 
and  unwillingly  refers  to  as  "  provincial  English  "  is 
very  English,  and  many  words  that  he  refers  to  as 
English  are  provincial  Latin.  Thus  the  word  verity 
has  never  been  acclimatised,  but  Is  a  lexicographer's 
exotic.  As  soon  as  It  Is  written  verlhood,  to  match 
the  Dutch  waarheid  and  the  German  wahrheit,  it 


40  The  New  Word 

rhymes  with  falsehood,  and  sounds  like  an  English 
word.  The  philologist  sits  in  his  library,  and  cons 
the  dusty  manuscripts  in  which  Roman  missionaries 
and  Latin  scholars  have  quaintly  travestied  the 
native  speech,  while  underneath  his  windows  the 
children  playing  In  the  street  are  pouring  out  better 
information  from  the  well  of  English  undefiled.  As 
soon  as  the  English  get  away  from  their  Latin 
colleges  Into  some  wild  land  that  Caesar  never  knew, 
their  own  words  bubble  up  like  a  natural  spring,  and 
the  Aryan  root  is  found  budding  and  blossoming 
again.  Because  these  old-new  blossoms  are  not 
in  his  specimen  book,  the  philologist  calls  them 
weeds. 

The  last  great  struggle  of  all  those  that  have  gone 
to  make  English  took  place  in  and  around  London, 
and  the  chief  antagonists  were  the  Low  Dutch 
dialects  of  the  East  coast,  as  the  spoken  language, 
and  provincial  Latin  as  the  written  one.  The  com- 
promise has  been  drawn  up  in  spelling,  and  as  the 
spelling  was  in  the  hands  of  the  writers,  the  record 
is  a  one-sided  one,  and  by  that  one-sided  record 
English  philology  has  long  been  led  astray.  It  is  an 
encouraging  sign  that  Skeat  should  be  the  first  to 
allow  that  the  Netherland  dialects  may  have  had 
some  influence  on  English,  though  he  characteristic- 
ally does  not  look  deeper  than  such  historical  In- 
cidents as  the  treaties  of  Edward  III  and  the  ex- 
peditions of  Elizabeth.  Were  he  aware  that  within 
living  memory  the  Yarmouth  fisherman  understood 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation       41 

his  Rotterdam  neighbour  almost  better  than  his 
Plymouth  countrymen,  the  philologist  might  be 
brought  to  see  that  the  Dutch  work-book  is  likely 
to  be  a  safer  guide  than  most  monkish  manuscripts 
to  "provincial  English." 

In  the  meanwhile  I  hope  he  will  accept  these  sug- 
gestions in  the  spirit  in  which  they  are  uttered,  as 
those  of  a  provincial  Englishman. 


Since  I  first  wrote  this  Letter  there  has  come  inter 
my  hands  a  work  by  Breal  entitled  La  Semantique, 
which  an  English  professor  of  philology  treats  as 
the  first  recognition  of  the  need  for  a  science,  or  at 
least  a  history,  of  the  meaning  of  words.  That 
seems  to  be  the  science  the  need  for  which  was  recog- 
nised by  Socrates  in  the  market  place  of  Athens, 
and  that  Is  the  science  I  have  had  to  piece  out  for 
myself  as  best  I  could  in  this  inquiry;  and  which 
I  call  verihood,  Instead  of  truth. 

Truth  is  the  merit  of  the  speaker  rather  than  of 
the  speech.  The  speaker  may  be  truthful,  and  yet 
his  story  may  not  be  true.  The  witness  who  is  sworn 
to  tell  "  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but 
the  truth,"  is  only  sworn  to  tell  what  happened  as 
he  saw  it.  He  does  not  swear  that  he  saw  rightly, 
and  that  his  story  is  the  correct  one.  The  correct 
story  has  to  be  put  together  by  the  jury,  who  are 


42  The  New  Word 

sworn  to  give  "  a  true  verdict  according  to  the  evi- 
dence." The  verdict  is  the  collected  and  corrected 
truth. 

No  imaginary  Aryan  root  has  been  found  for  truth. 
But  its  sensible  root  underlies  words  like  try  and  utter, 
in  short  it  is  the  strength  of  the  tongue.  The  im- 
aginary Aryan  root,  offered  by  Skeat  with  a  "per- 
haps," for  verihood,  is  war^  one  of  four  imaginary 
wars,  and  said  to  mean  "  to  choose,"  and  thence  "  to 
believe."  For  a  sensible  root  we  have  only  to  go  out 
into  the  play-ground.  Ware!  is  the  cry  that  can 
still  be  heard  on  the  lips  of  the  English  schoolboy. 
It  is  found  in  written  English  in  such  words  as  aware 
and  wary.  The  word  wary  calls  up  a  picture  of  the 
wild  man  of  the  woods,  crouched  with  one  ear  to 
the  ground,  his  fingers  tightening  on  his  knife,  and 
his  whole  soul  astrain  to  catch  the  first  faint  rustle 
that  shall  bewray  the  hidden  foe.  Such  a  cry  as 
Ware!  is  worth  a  library  of  manuscript.  We  need 
no  imaginary  Aryan  root  to  help  us  to  its  meaning. 
It  means  "  Hear  with  all  your  might ! "  It  is  the 
strength  of  the  ear  at  its  highest  pitch.  If  there  be 
any  root  in  word-lore  this  cry  must  be  it.  It  is 
perhaps  the  one  word  in  English  that  has  come 
straight  down  without  a  change  from  the  real  Aryans ; 
— and  it  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Etymological 
Dictionary! 

On  these  lines  truth  and  verihood  explain  each 
other.     Both  words  imply  a  speaker  and  a  listener. 


Psychology :  The  Personal  Equation        43 

What  the  one  tries  to  tell  is  truth,  and  what  the 
other  yearns  to  hear  is  verihood.  Of  these  two  the 
important  standpoint  is  the  listener's,  because  It  is 
for  his  sake  that  the  speech  is  made,  and  what  he 
hears  is  all  that  has  been  really  and  effectually  said. 
The  impression  matters  more  than  the  expression. 
The  gist  of  the  speech  is  what  is  left  in  the  mind 
of  the  listener,  and  by  his  understanding  of  it  it  must 
be  judged. 

Hence  verihood  is  a  greater  word  than  truth,  as 
the  verdict  is  greater  than  the  evidence.  Verihood  is 
the  bull's  eye  that  truth  aims  at,  and  falsehood  the 
inner  or  outer  it  must  so  often  be  content  to  hit.  iVnd 
that  is  to  say,  in  other  words,  that  verlhood's  opposite 
pole  is  truth,  and  its  circumference  falsehood. 

The  science  of  semantics  is  thus  revealed  as  a 
branch  of  physical  mathematics.  The  semantolog- 
ical  specialist  will  now  be  able  to  define  the  word 
Idealist  for  himself.  My  story  is  meant  to  be  read 
by  the  untrained  mind. 

VI 

It  has  been  well  saia  that  all  the  stories  in  the 
world  have  only  forty  plots  between  them,  and  all 
the  words  have  not  many  more  sensible  roots.  We 
are  indebted  to  Erdmann  for  the  hint  that  the  name 
Goth  meant  brave,  much  as  Frank  meant  free, — the 
aut  of  the  Icelandic  Gautar  being  one  with  the  aud 


'44  The  New  Word 

of  the  Latin  audax,  or  audacious — which  Mrs.  Gamp, 
with  nicer  scholarship  than  that  of  Oxford,  sounded 
ozvdaciotts.  Be  that  as  it  may,  an  outspoken  work 
calls  for  a  brave  reader;  and  I  am  writing  to  the 
Gothic  mind,  that  is  to  say,  to  the  White  mind  rather 
than  the  Black. 

For  the  ontologist  there  are  no  coincidences,  but 
only  Rhymes.  I  will  not  think  it  is  for  nothing 
that  in  the  queen  city  of  the  Baltic,  in  the  homeland 
of  the  Goths,  from  which,  as  from  the  citadel  of  the 
White  race,  went  forth  those  armies  that  struck 
down  the  Rome  of  Caesar,  and  once  again  scared 
back  the  Roman  eagle  from  Pomerania  to  the  Dan- 
ube; I  will  not  think  it  is  in  vain  that  a  countryman 
of  Alaric  and  Gustav  Adolf  has  given  it  in  charge  to 
a  Court  that  represents  the  White  mind  in  its  pre- 
eminence, to  draw  up  by  its  decisions  the  canon  of 
the  scriptures  of  the  new  age.  The  mathematician 
has  a  greater  license  than  the  poet  to  ignore  reafity 
in  working  out  his  problems.  I  shall  be  forgiven 
if  I  have  sometimes  lost  sight  of  the  Academy  of 
to-day  in  that  White  City  of  the  North;  if  I  have 
sometimes  forgotten  a  thousand  years  and  written 
to  the  Academy  that  shall  sit  hereafter,  in  the  new 
Asgard,  in  the  Hall  of  the  Aesir; — forgiven  if  I  have 
sometimes  lifted  up  my  eyes,  and  written  as  in  the 
sight  of  the  White  Gods. 

To  understand,  says  the  French  poet.  Is  to  forgive. 
Yet  which  of  us  can  hope  wholly  to  understand 


Psychology:  The  Personal  Equation       45 

another,  or  to  be  understood?     Which  of  us  can 
thoroughly  pierce,  from  within  or  from  without — < 

The  shell  we  slaves  of  time  drag  with  us  ever, 
Through  which  our  souls,  as  if  immured  in  glass, 
Become  distorted,  and  we  peer  and  strain, 
But  find  each  other's  real  features  never; 
A  fateful  screen  that  friendship  cannot  pass, 
And  love  beats  his  soft  wings  against  in  vain. 


THIRD  HEAD 


THE  CASTLE  IN  THE  AIR 

A  Golden  Talisman. — i.  The  Babu  Speech. — 2.  Bad 
Language. — 3.  "Dynamite." — 4.  The  Science  of  Shells, 
— 5.     Idol  and  Ideal, — 6.     An  Algebraical  Expression. 

HAT  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  Idealist, 
or  Idealistic,  as  used  by  Nobel  in  this  Testa- 
ment? 

The  question  is  not — what  is  Idealism?  It  is — 
what  kind  of  books  did  the  Testator  wish  to  receive 
this  Prize? 

It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  the  second  of  these 
questions  is  very  much  easier  to  answer  than  the 
first.  No  one  has  ever  succeeded  in  defining  poetry 
to  any  one  else's  satisfaction — a  chemist  might  define 
it  as  the  crystal  of  prose — but  universities  and 
academies  award  prizes  every  year  for  poems,  and 
no  difficulty  is  felt  as  to  what  works  are  eligible  for 
the  prize.  Again,  an  able  writer  named  Austin  once 
set  himself  to  determine  the  province  of  jurispru- 
dence. He  died  leaving  his  work  unfinished;  and 
the  extensive  fragment  that  remains  is  an  endless 
chain  of  definitions,  not  one  of  them  complete.  He 
attempts  to  define  a  law,  a  right,  and  so  on,  and  the 
more  he  toils,  the  more  endless  his  task  becomes. 

46 


Etymology:  The  Castle  in  the  Air        47 

Yet  the  Courts  never  sit  for  a  day  without  using  the 
words  law  and  right  in  some  practical  application; 
and  Austin  was  himself  professor  of  jurisprudence. 

The  difference  between  a  legal  argument  and  a 
logical  one  is  that  the  former  is  concerned  with  some 
practical  issue,  such  as  the  disposal  of  a  sum  of 
money,  and  is  determined  by  the  judgment  of  a 
Court.  That  is  the  difference  which  Nobel  has  made 
by  this  bequest.  This  bag  of  gold  of  his  has  seemed 
to  me  a  talisman,  trusting  in  which  we  may  adventure 
In  the  enchanted  wood  of  words;  by  means  of  which 
we  may  conjure  the  demons  that  infest  it,  and  compel 
the  sorcerer's  victims  to  resume  their  natural  shape. 

As  well  as  a  talisman,  we  are  provided  with  a 
compass,  by  the  words  which  are  the  governing 
clause  of  the  whole  Testment — "  the  benefit  of 
mankind."  Should  we  be  tempted  to  stray  into 
devious  paths,  should  we  find  ourselves  wandering 
round  and  round  without  advancing  from  our  start- 
ing-point, we  have  only  to  glance  at  this  compass, 
and  It  will  point  us  forward  in  the  right  direction, 
towards  the  enchanted  castle  of  the  ogre. 

So  armed,  so  guided,  the  White  Knight  Errant 
ought  to  reach  his  bourn. 


Ideal,  Idealism,  Idealist — these  words  are  current 
In  most  of  the  languages  of  America  and  Europe, 
but  they  are  not  natives  of  any.    They  appear  In  the 


48  The  New  Word 

same  form  In  Swedish  and  in  English,  but  they  are 
not  of  Swedish  nor  of  English  growth.  They  wear 
a  look  of  ancient  Greece,  but  yet  they  are  not  gen- 
uine Greek  words.  Plato  never  heard  of  them;  the 
Greek  lexicon  knows  them  not. 

They  belong  to  a  large  and  increasing  class  of 
words  which  I  can  best  characterise  by  naming  them 
Babu. 

The  English  in  India,  whether  to  make  the  task 
of  government  easier,  or  in  the  belief  that  our  civili- 
sation must  be  better  for  the  Hindus  than  their  own, 
have  set  up  schools  to  train  the  natives  in  our  ways, 
and,  to  begin  with,  in  our  speech.  There  is  a  large 
class  of  natives  called  Babus  who  learn  very  readily 
up  to  a  certain  point,  that  is  to  say,  they  spell  our 
words  correctly,  and  they  have  some  notion  of  what 
the  words  mean;  but  English  has  not  replaced  their 
native  speech,  and  hence  it  fits  them  like  a  borrowed 
garment,  and  they  are  betrayed  into  awkward  and 
laughable  mistakes  in  using  it,  which  have  given  rise 
to  the  term  Babu  English. 

Now  that  is  just  the  process  from  which  a  great 
part  of  Europe,  and  especially  England  itself,  has 
been  suffering  for  many  hundreds  of  years.  Our 
speech  bewrays  us  to  be  the  freedmen  of  Rome. 
Our  schools  are  Roman  schools  set  up  by  missionaries 
from  the  Mediterranean  In  whose  minds  It  was  the 
very  aim  and  end  of  education  to  tame  the  young 
barbarian  of  the  North  into  an  obedient  provincial  of 
the  great  Roman  Raj.    Saint  NInlan,  It  Is  candidly 


Etymology :  The  Castle  in  the  Air       49 

recorded,  went  to  convert  the  PIcts  to  Christianity 
in  the  hope  of  putting  an  end  to  their  attacks  upon 
their  Christian  neighbours.  The  work  of  the  monks 
has  remained  practically  untouched  ever  since.  Our 
schools  are  still  called  grammar  schools,  which  means 
Latin-grammar  schools,  and  Latin  is  the  chief  thing 
taught  in  them.  Latin  is  the  official  language  of 
our  universities,  and  by  an  educated  man  we  mean 
a  man  who  has  been  taught  Latin.  The  whole 
theory  of  our  education  still  Is  that  the  young  Eng- 
lishman should  make-believe  to  be  an  ancient  Roman. 
The  king  who  still  writes  himself  on  his  coins 
Britannorum  Rex  Is  doing  homage  for  his  crown  to 
Pope  and  Caesar. 

After  the  Normans  came  in  aid  of  the  monks 
England  seemed  to  hang  In  doubt  between  the  Gothic 
and  Romance  dialects.  The  result  of  this  is  seen  in 
our  vocabulary.  We  have,  In  a  more  marked  degree 
than  any  other  European  people,  two  sets  of  words, 
folk  words  and  book  words.  The  first  we  learn  at 
home,  and  use  most  in  talking;  the  second  we  learn 
at  school,  and  use  most  In  writing.  The  folk  words 
come  to  us  as  the  wrappings  of  our  earliest  thoughts 
and  feelings,  and  form,  as  it  were,  the  mind's  natural 
skin.  The  book  words  follow  after  the  brain  has 
began  to  harden,  and  are  more  like  clothing  which 
the  mind  puts  on.  We  use  them  as  children  who 
walk  in  wooden  shoes, — not  with  the  same  sure  and 
elastic  tread  as  they  who  go  barefoot. 

Let  it  not  be  thought  that  all  this  Is  beside  the 


50  The  New  Word 

question.  It  goes  to  the  heart  of  the  question.  That 
schoolmaster's  Latin  should  be  a  Latin  which  would 
make  Cicero  stare  and  laugh  Is  a  little  evil.  But 
that  men  should  go  through  life  talking  to  one  an- 
other In  words  which  they  only  half  understand  Is 
a  great  evil.  And  that  children  should  have  their 
minds  beaten  and  bent  out  of  shape  by  such  words 
has  long  seemed  to  me  the  most  frightful  evil  in  the 
world. 

There  Is  a  word  which  we  spell  quack,  and  our 
Dutch  kinsfolk  kwak.  With  us  it  means  a  false  pre- 
tender to  knowledge;  In  Holland  It  Is  the  nickname 
for  a  Latin-school  pupil.  The  little  Dutch  street  boy 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  listening  outside  the  door  of  the 
Latin  school,  heard  the  boys  inside  repeating  their 
hie  hcec  hoc,  and  it  sounded  to  him  like  the  gabbling 
of  ducks. 

I  share  the  feeling  of  that  little  street  boy.  I 
also  stand  ouslde  the  door  of  the  Latin  school,  and 
listen  to  the  patter  that  goes  on  Inside,  without  any 
reverence.  I  should  like  to  break  open  the  door 
of  the  Latin  school,  and  take  that  dusty,  dog-eared 
grammar-book  out  of  the  schoolmaster's  hand,  and 
put  an  end  for  ever  to  that  miserable  gabble. 

Somehow  I  think  that  the  work  of  the  Idealist  will 
have  to  begin  here. 

II 

Unhappily  the  priests  of  science  have  shown  them- 
selves not  less  prone  than  other  priesthoods  to  Im- 


Etymology :  The  Castle  in  the  Air        51 

pose  on  the  mind  of  man  by  means  of  bad  language. 
To  the  medieval  plague  of  dog-latin  there  has  suc- 
ceeded in  these  latter  days  the  plague  of  Babu  Greek. 

The  apologists  for  this  vice  of  science  tell  us  that 
it  is  merely  a  kind  of  shorthand.  I  am  sorry  I  do 
not  find  that  it  is  really  quicker  to  write  dolichocephal 
than  longhead,  or  ichthyosauros  than  eft. 

But  in  any  case  the  number  of  readers  who  carry 
at  their  tongue's  end  all  the  words  found  in  the 
extant  remains  of  Hellenic  literature  is  very  small. 
So  that  whatever  trouble  the  specialist  may  save  to 
himself  by  writing  chaemoprosopic  for  broad-faced, 
he  causes  to  his  readers,  who  have  to  turn  the  short- 
hand into  longhand  as  they  go  along.  Hence  a 
modern  scientific  work  is  not  truly  a  book.  It  is 
more  and  more  a  manual  in  which  the  text  is  helped 
out  by  technical  signs.  It  is  not  so  much  literature 
as  algebra. 

Ill 

Nevertheless  if  the  use  of  these  bastard  Mediter- 
ranean words  were  confined  to  the  naming  of  things 
like  rocks  and  plants  and  animals  the  quarrel  with 
them  might  be  left  to  the  man  of  letters.  Words 
like  amoeba  and  neolithic  are  ugly  and  tiresome, 
but  they  are  not  false  and  mischievous.  There  is 
even  a  subtle  elegance  in  naming  fossils  In  a  fossil 
tongue. 

It  is  a  very  different  matter  when  such  words  are 


52  The  New  Word 

caught  hold  of  to  name  thoughts  Instead  of  things; 
and  when  men  make-believe  that  they  have  said 
something  in  shorthand  which  they  could  not  say  in 
longhand. 

The  difference  cannot  be  illustrated  better  than 
by  two  words  which  are  peculiarly  associated  with 
the  name  of  Nobel — dynamite  and  idealist. 

Dynamite  is  the  name  of  a  mixture  which  Nobel 
made,  and  as  long  as  we  have  the  mixture  itself  the 
name  is  of  no  consequence.  The  mixture  might  as 
well  have  been  named  strongness  or  starkhet,  or  X, 
or  noheUte;  even  if  it  had  been  labelled  by  the  Greek 
word  for  weakness  instead  of  strength  it  still  would 
not  have  mattered.  Because  if  we  want  to  know 
what  dynamite  is  we  need  not  go  to  the  Greek  lexi- 
con ;  we  can  go  to  the  mixture  itself. 

Now  that  is  just  what  we  cannot  do  in  the  case  of 
the  word  idealist.  If  Nobel  had  pointed  out  any 
book,  for  instance  Swedenborg's  Arcana  Coelestia, 
or  Kant's  Kritik  der  reinen  Vernunft,  or  Carlyle's 
Sartor  Resartus,  as  the  kind  of  book  he  meant  to 
receive  the  prize,  we  should  have  had  something  in 
the  nature  of  a  mixture.  As  it  is,  "  idealist "  remains 
the  name  of  a  thought  in  Nobel's  mind.  Instead  of 
being  able  to  look  past  the  name  of  the  thing,  we 
have  to  guess,  if  we  can,  the  thought  from  the  name. 

It  is  just  here  that  the  harmfulness  of  Babu  makes 
itself  manifest.  It  is  when  we  pass  from  the  outer 
world  of  things  to  the  inner  world  of  thoughts  that 
we  need  to  be  most  careful  of  the  words  we  use; 


Etymology :  The  Castle  in  the  Air       53 

it  is  then  that  the  Mediterranean  words  are  apt  to 
serve  us  like  ill-made  panes  of  glass  through  which 
the  light  comes  crookedly;  and  the  spirit  of  man, 
bound  in  these  borrowed  cerements,  ceases  to  soar 
and  grow. 

It  was  not  by  accident  that  the  Protestant  Refor- 
mation began  with  the  translation  of  the  Bible,  and 
ended  with  the  translation  of  the  Mass  Book.  The 
great  reformers  disagreed  about  many  other  things, 
but  a  common  instinct  made  them  teach  men  to  pray 
in  their  native  tongue.  They  reformed  the  churches 
— the  pity  of  it  is  that  they  did  not  reform  the 
schools. 


IV 


The  word  before  us,  then,  is  not  a  label,  the  sort 
of  word  that  the  old  Mediterranean  grammar-books 
call  a  noun.  It  is  what  they  ignorantly  call  an  adjec- 
tive; it  is  the  expression  of  a  feeling,  like  those 
unshapen  cries  in  which  speech  began.  It  is  the 
expression  of  a  wish;  perhaps  a  wish  not  quite  dis- 
tinct in  the  Testator's  own  mind;  perhaps  a  hope 
rather  than  a  wish. 

It  seems  to  me  that  he  may  have  used  an  indis- 
tinct word  because  his  wish  was  indistinct.  He  may 
have  hoped  that  he  could  say  in  shorthand  what  he 
could  not  say  in  longhand,  that  Babu  could  say  what 
Swedish  could  not  say.  I  think,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  if  he  had  cast  about  to  find  a  Swedish  word  it 


^4  The  New  Word 

would  have  helped  us  to  understand  His  wish.  I 
think  that  to  translate  his  word  would  be  almost  to 
interpret  it. 

The  mind  may  be  likened  to  a  tree  whose  roots 
are  feelings  and  whose  leaves  are  words.  Some 
words  leave  off  where  they  begin,  they  are  emotions 
expressed  in  sound,  like  musical  notes — such  as  the 
old  grammar-books  call  interjections.  But  most 
words  have  taken  shape  by  coming  into  touch  with 
outside  sounds,  and  with  the  sights  and  scents,  the 
tastes  and  touches,  that  go  together  with  the  sounds. 
Whether  the  word  thing  or  think  comes  first  in  his- 
tory, a  thought  is  a  feeling  oxitlined  by  means  of 
things. 

In  this  way  there  is  in  every  word  a  native  element 
of  feeling,  or  a  mark  set  on  it  by  the  word  of  sense, 
which  cleaves  to  it  through  whatever  uses  it  may 
pass  and  change.  The  word  may  be  abstracted  and 
refined  away,  till  it  appears  like  a  balloon  in  the 
air;  but  still  it  will  be  a  captive  balloon,  attached 
by  some  root  meaning,  as  by  a  cord,  to  the  firm 
earth  beneath. 

Philology  is  busy  with  the  changes  In  the  forms 
of  words.  Our  lexicons  have  long  been  cabinets  of 
shells.  Yet  the  morphology  of  words  Is  but  a  drudg- 
ery unless  it  helps  us  towards  their  physiology. — 
The  word  Idealist  is  such  a  shell.  Let  us  see  what 
its  outward  form  can  tell  us  of  the  life  within. 


Etymology :  The  Castle  in  the  Air       55 


Idealist  is  a  Babu  formation  from  the  Greek  Idea. 

Idea,  my  Greek  lexicon  reports,  is  the  appearance 
of  a  thing,  as  opposed  to  its  reality.  And  it  is  un- 
fortunately the  case  that  some  such  sense  as  that 
of  opposition  to  reality  does  haunt  the  word  Idealist, 
and  discredit  it.  No  one  is  likely  to  believe  that 
works  of  an  apparent  or  unreal  tendency  are  of  much 
benefit  to  mankind.    We  must  dig  deeper. 

Idea  can  be  traced  to  ido,  or  eido,  ( for  there  were 
more  Greeks  than  those  who  corrected  Demosthenes) 
— meaning  to  look  or  see.  It  is  the  Aryan  word 
which  has  become  in  English  though.  "  It  is  as 
though  "  means  "  it  looks  like."  And  so  the  word 
idea,  in  its  first  sense,  may  be  rendered  pretty  closely 
by  the  English  look,  In  such  uses  as—"  the  look  of 
the  thing,"  "  there  Is  a  look  of  his  father  about  him." 

The  passage  from  the  idea  to  the  ideal  was  not 
made  by  the  Greeks.  But  it  seems  that  idea  is  the 
Ionian  form  of  the  word  which  meets  us  In  other 
Greek  dialects  as  eidos,  and  although  the  Greeks  did 
not  add  the  important  letter  /  to  Idea,  they  did  add 
it  to  eidos;  and  their  eidolon  Is  spelt  by  us  idol. 
What  is  the  difference  between  the  Ideal  and  the 
Idol? 

The  Idol  Is  the  Idea  embodied  In  wood  or  stone. 
It  seems  to  have  grown  solid  by  degrees.  There  was 
first  the  mere  look,  or  likeness,  and  next  the  ghost. 


56  The  New  Word 

We  catch  the  shade  of  meaning  in  passing  from 
"  appearance  "  to  "  apparition."  Lastly  there  came 
the  marble  likeness  of  the  ghost;  as  it  were,  the 
materialised  idea. 

Now  whatever  else  the  ideal  may  be,  It  is  not  a 
marble  image.  Bacon,  it  is  true,  uses  the  word  idol 
in  a  sense  not  far  removed  from  ideal.  He  uses  it 
as  a  Christian  metaphor  for  thoughts  that  receive 
honour  not  their  due,  as  the  images  of  Jupiter  and 
Venus  received  honour  due  to  Christ.  But  if  we 
should  take  ideal  as  meaning  a  thought  that  received 
too  much  honour,  it  is  clear  that  a  work  of  an  idealist 
tendency  would  be  harmful,  rather  than  beneficial, 
to  mankind.  Nevertheless  Bacon's  usage  gives  us  a 
useful  hint.  The  ideal  Is  evidently  a  thought  rather 
than  a  statue,  and  to  that  extent  it  may  be  called 
a  metaphorical  idol. 

In  what,  then,  does  it  differ  from  an  idea?  The 
Greek  lexicon  has  not  half  done  its  work  In  telling 
us  that  idea  meant  appearance.  Even  in  Plato's 
time  It  had  got  farther  than  that.  Aquinas,  who 
wrote  In  Latin,  and  translates  It  by  the  Latin  forma, 
explains  idea  as  being  the  builder's  plan  of  a  not- 
yet-built  house.  Now  my  Dutch  word-book  renders 
"idea"  (as  an  English  word)  by  ontwerp,  which  is 
to  say,  out-throw — that  which  the  mind  throws  out, 
and  not  what  it  takes  In.  And  in  Holland  a  builder's 
plan  is  called  an  ontwerp.  When  the  mind  of  a 
great  Roman  theologian  jumps  with  the  common 
mind  of  a  Dutch  folk,  we  ought  to  be  able  to  take 


Etymology :  The  Castle  in  the  Air       57 

the  result  with  some  security.  And  it  is  the  opposite 
pole  of  the  meaning  given  us  by  the  lexicon.  The 
idea  is  not  the  appearance  of  a  thing  already  there, 
but  rather  the  Imagination  of  a  thing  not  yet  there. 
It  is  not  the  look  of  a  thing,  it  is  a  looking  forward 
to  a  thing. 

Here,  then.  Is  the  difference  between  the  ideal 
and  the  idol.  The  ideal  is  not  the  realisation  In  brick 
and  mortar  of  the  builder's  plan,  as  the  idol  is  the 
realisation  in  marble  of  the  sculptor's  plan.  The 
ideal  is  not  a  house  made  with  hands;  it  Is  a  castle 
In  the  air. 


VI 


The  word  ideal  first  appears  in  English  as  an  adjec- 
tive. The  added  /  has  much  the  same  force  in  Greek 
and  English,  the  force  of  -ly  or  like,  the  Swedish 
lik.  It  is  hard  not  to  see  in  this  like  a  connection 
with  look,  such  as  that  between  idea  and  ido.  Eng- 
lish philology,  however,  speaking  by  the  latest  of 
its  interpreters,  traces  It  to  the  old  English  lie,  mean- 
ing a  body,  like  another  Swedish  lik  (corpse).  If 
that  were  so,  the  ideal  would  be  again  the  embodied 
idea,  in  short  the  idol.  It  would  be  the  house,  and 
not  the  castle  In  the  air. 

Of  course  It  Is  not  so.  It  puts  the  cart  before  the 
horse.  Philology  has  made  its  favourite  mistake  of 
thinking  the  noun  Is  older  than  the  adjective.  The 
name  of  an  outward  shape  is  never  the  first  form 


^8  The  New  Word 

of  any  word,  unless  it  be  a  word  like  cuckoo,  or  the 
French  word  teuf-teuf.  We  must  dig  deeper.  When 
we  come  down  to  such  a  word  as  lick,  the  Swedish 
slika,  the  very  sound  of  the  tongue  in  licking,  we 
cannot  go  much  farther;  and  we  may  be  sure  that 
we  have  got  the  root  of  the  word,  and  all  words 
naturally  springing  out  of  it.  We  do  not  need  to 
look  in  Beowulf  or  the  Saxon  Chronicle  for  the 
meaning  of  such  a  word.  English  philology  has 
gone  blind  through  too  much  poring  over  manu- 
scripts. The  Old  English  manuscripts  that  have 
come  down  to  us  are  few,  and  they  are  not  very  old. 
There  are  more  fish  in  the  sea  than  in-  the  fisherman's 
net. 

The  early  man  was  a  poet  before  he  was  a  philol- 
ogist, and  perhaps  it  takes  a  poet  to  understand 
those  words  of  his,  which  were  not  dead  shells,  but 
living  cells,  growing  and  changing  with  his  growing 
and  changing  moods.  What  the  tongue  does  in 
licking  is  what  the  eye  does  in  looking,  it  feels-forth, 
reaching  outward  from  the  man.  The  words  look 
and  see  contain  between  them  the  whole  secret  of 
metaphysics.  To  look  is  to  search  forth  for  what 
may  be  there;  to  see  is  to  take  in  what  the  look 
finds.  Looking  is  the  question,  and  sight  the  an- 
swer. Sight  is  materialistic,  perhaps  looking  may 
turn  out  to  be  idealistic. 

If,  then,  the  mysterious  /  does  not  add  a  body 
to  the  idea,  what  does  it  add?  It  is,  in  its  root- 
meaning,  the  same  with  idea.    Wc  seem  to  be  dealing 


Etymology:  The  Castle  in  the  Air        59 

with  an  algebraical  expression.  Ideal  is  idea  to  the 
second  power.    We  might  as  well  write  It  idea^. 

The  knot  remains  unpicked.  For  this  powerful 
idea  seems  very  much  like  an  Idol  of  the  mind.  The 
writer  who  has  given  the  word  most  currency  in 
English  is  Carlyle,  and  he  uses  it  in  very  much  that 
sense.  He  speaks  of  "low  Ideals"  as  well  as  "high 
ideals,"  and  of  the  "ideal  of  brute  strength"  as  a 
bad  Ideal.  If  there  be  bad  ideals  as  well  as  good 
ideals,  a  work  of  an  idealist  tendency  may  easily 
be  harmful,  instead  of  beneficial,  to  mankind.  The 
value  of  an  ideal  to  mankind  must  depend  on  some- 
thing else  besides  its  power.  Even  if  it  should  be 
argued  that  this  bequest  is  meant  for  works  of  a 
fanatical  tendency,  yet  it  will  not  be  argued  that  it 
is  for  all  such  works,  including  the  fanaticism  of 
the  Dominican,  and  including  the  fanaticism  of  the 
Thug. 

Thus  far  the  science  of  shells  has  brought  us.  It 
IS  time  to  check  Philology  by  Lexicography. 


FOURTH  HEAD 


THE  PLAY  UPON  WORDS 

Johnson's     Dictionary. — I.       The     Missing     Word. — 

2.      Recurring  Decimals 3.      'A    Puzzle   for  Atheists. — 

4.     Plato  Refuted  by  Plato. — 5.     Books  in  Chains. 

C\^  reading  this  Will  for  the  first  time,  and  won- 
^"^  dering  what  the  word  Idealistic  meant  to  others 
than  myself,  I  turned  to  an  English  dictionary. 


The  dictiotiary  which  I  found  to  my  hand  hap- 
pened to  be  the  famous  work  of  Doctor  Johnson,  or, 
to  speak  carefully,  one  founded  on  that  work  by 
Doctor  Latham,  who  was  an  esteemed  philologist, 
and  professor  of  the  English  language.  It  is  in 
four  vast  volumes,  published  just  fourteen  years  be- 
fore the  date  of  the  Testator's  death,  by  nineteen 
publishers,  and  it  should  be  fairly  representative  of 
the  science  and  art  of  lexicography  in  England. 

The  words  are  taken  in  the  order  of  their  spelling; 
each  one  is  given  a  Latin  label  such  as  substantive 
or  adjective;  if  in  its  sounds  or  spelling  it  shows  the 
mark  of  the  Roman  mint  a  Mediterranean  word  is 
quoted  as  its  original;  then  follows  the  explanation 

60 


Lexicography:  The  Play  upon  Words      6l 

(the  thing  I  was  In  search  of) — and  Johnson's  Dic- 
tionary is  renowned  for  its  explanations;  and  lastly 
there  come  extracts  from  books  in  which  the  word 
is  used. 

These  extracts  were  styled  by  Johnson  his  authori- 
ties. His  whole  habit  of  mind  withheld  him  from 
seeing  that  the  speech  of  the  English  folk  is  a  higher 
authority  than  any  book.  "  Of  the  laborious  and 
mercantile  part  of  the  people  (he  writes),  the  diction 
Is  in  a  great  measure  casual  and  mutable."  That  is 
not  so.  The  folk  keep  their  native  words  much 
longer  and  much  better  than  the  bookmen.  Hundreds 
of  English  words  long  buried  under  the  dust  of 
Dryasdust  are  coming  to  light,  and  are  returning 
Into  English  literature  from  the  ends  of  the  earth, 
to-day.  Johnson,  it  Is  plain,  could  not  rid  himself  of 
the  old  monkish  way  of  looking  at  it.  To  him  the 
right  English  was  a  barbarous  provincial  dialect;  the 
language  worthy  of  a  scholar's  attention  was  that 
which  came  closest  to  the  Roman  pattern.  He  has 
told  us  this,  by  calling  his  work  a  dictionary  and 
not  a  word-book. 

The  same  wrongheadedness  makes  itself  manifest 
In  his  treatment,  and  in  Latham's  treatment,  of  some 
words  admitted  to  these  volumes. 

There  are  many  words  common  to  both  the  Baltic 
and  the  Mediterranean;  some  of  them  common  to 
every  Aryan  dialect;  some  of  them  older  than  the 
Aryan  invasion,  if  there  was  an  Aryan  invasion, 
relics  of  the  old  stone-cutting  race  that  crossed  from 


62  The  New  Word 

Africa  In  the  wake  of  the  retreating  ice.  The  Roman 
missionaries  latinised  some  of  these  words,  much  as 
they  christianised  the  pagan  folklore.  And  so  to-day 
the  Johnsons  and  the  Lathams  mark  as  Roman  Im- 
portations words  that  are  only  Roman  in  the  spelling, 
words  that  were  rooted  in  the  northern  speech  before 
one  stone  of  Rome  was  laid  upon  another. 

Many  of  the  words  thus  treated  dropped  out  of 
spoken  English,  and  their  place  was  taken  by  others 
whose  outline  was  too  stubborn  to  be  effaced  by 
foreign  spelling.  Thus  the  English  folk,  robbed  of 
verihood  by  the  monks.  Instinctively  refused  the 
Roman  verity,  and  took  refuge  In  truth. 

If  a  man  does  not  know  these  things  by  heart,  if 
he  has  never  caught  a  true  glimpse  Into  the  history 
of  words,  what  can  he  tell  us  about  their  meanings? 
If  he  cannot  see  that  even  the  spellings,  the  outer 
shells  of  words,  are  often  palimpsests  in  which  the 
writing  on  the  surface  hides  another  and  yet  another 
writing  underneath — If  he  cannot  see  this,  how  can 
we  hope  that  his  glance  will  be  keener  when  he  comes 
to  consider  the  meaning  which  Is  the  life  of  the  word; 
and  that  his  explanation  of  It  will  be  anything  better 
than  the  gabble  of  the  Latin  school? 

I  turned  to  Doctor  Latham's  volumes  with  mis- 
giving, and  the  first  discovery  I  made  was  an  ominous 
one.     The  word  used  by  Nobel  was  not  there. 


Lexicography :  The  Play  upon  Words      63 

II 

Instead  I  found  this  entry: — 

*'  Idealist  substantive.  Supporter  of  the  doctrine 
of  idealism." 

The  only  Inference  was  that  a  work  of  an  idealist 
tendency  must  be  one  supporting  the  same  doctrine. 
I  asked  Doctor  Latham  what  the  doctrine  was,  and 
I  got  this  answer: 

"  Idealism. — System  of  metaphysical  philosophy 
founded  upon  the  doctrine  that  the  objects  of  the 
external  world  are  what  they  are,  less  on  the  strength 
of  any  material  properties  of  their  own,  than  through 
the  action  of  the  mind,  in  which  they  exist  as  ideas." 

At  the  first  blush  my  plight  seemed  to  be  worse 
than  Herakles',  when  he  cut  off  the  hydra's  head; 
I  had  a  dozen  Babu  words  to  deal  with  instead  of 
one.    I  made  shift  to  turn  some  of  them  into  English. 

"The  stones  and  trees  of  the  outside  world  are 
what  they  are,  less  on  the  strength  of  any  stuff  of 
their  own,  than  through  the  working  of  the  mind, 
in  which  they  stand  forth  as — ideas." 

Before  examining  the  doctrine  further  it  seemed 
desirable  to  know  Doctor  Latham's  meaning  for  the 
word  idea.     Here  surely  was  the  key-word.     With- 


64  The  New  Word 

out  understanding  it,  it  must  be  hard  to  understand 
Idealist. 

I  looked  again,  and  found  an  explanation  as  short 
as  the  other  had  been  long. 

"  Idea — mental  image.'* 

Good.  But  the  word  image  is  sometimes  used  in 
a  loose  sense  by  poets.  To  make  more  sure  I  turned 
it  up. 

"Image — Any  corporeal  representation;  gener- 
ally used  of  statues." 

This  time  there  could  be  no  doubt.  The  image 
was  not  a  metaphor,  it  was  a  thing  of  stone  and 
marble.  Yet  I  was  struck  by  the  curious  result  of 
adding  this  explanation  to  the  last  one. 

Ideal=mental  image. 

Image=corporeal  representation. 

Idea=mental  corporeal  representation. 

Mental-corporeal?  The  words  seemed  to  unsay 
each  other.  It  was  like  what  the  logicians  call  a 
contradiction  in  terms.  In  order  to  be  fair  to  Doc- 
tor Latham  I  went  to  the  word  representation. 

"  Representation. — Image,  likeness." 

The  reappearance  of  the  image  so  soon  was  dis- 
concerting.    It  seemed  to  dog  the  lexicographer  as 


Lexicography :  The  Play  upon  Words      65 

the  Commander's  statue  dogged  Don  Juan.  His 
last  two  explanations  worked  out  thus: — 

Image=any  corporeal  representation. 

Representation=image. 

Image=any  corporeal  image. 

This  time  it  was  not  an  unsaying,  but  a  saying  over 
again,  like  what  the  logicians  call  an  identical  prop- 
osition. 

Meanwhile,  instead  of  getting  nearer  to  the  mean- 
ing of  idea,  Doctor  Latham  seemed  to  be  going 
round  and  round  it.  He  seemed  like  a  squirrel  trying 
to  climb  up  in  a  revolving  cage :  the  cage  goes  round, 
but  the  squirrel  gets  no  higher.  I  began  to  see  there 
might  be  books  in  which  the  words  went  round  and 
round,  but  the  author  got  no  further, — books  not 
altogether  outside  the  scope  of  this  enquiry. 

It  was  all  very  well  to  say  that  the  stones  and  trees 
were  only  representations  in  the  mind,  but  if  there 
were  no  stones  and  trees,  what  did  the  representa- 
tions represent?  In  order  to  give  Doctor  Latham 
every  chance,  I  followed  him  to  the  word  mind. 

Here  was  a  word  which  he  confessed  to  be  of  Eng- 
lish growth,  no  doubt  because  it  happens  to  be  found 
in  some  old  English  book,  where  it  is  spelt  gemynd. 
It  is  indeed  a  folk  word,  and  almost  a  cry.  "  Mind 
what  you  do !  " — "  I  have  a  great  mind  to!  " — "  He 
is  out  of  his  mind! " — all  these  are  utterances  heard 
every  dav.  S*-ch  a  word  should  be  a  fair  test  for  a 
professor  of  the  English  language. 

Doctor  Latham  explained  it  in  this  manner: — 


66  The  New  Word 

"Mind.  i.  Intelligent  power.  2.  Intellectual  ca- 
pacity. 3.  Liking;  choice;  Inclination;  propenslon; 
affection.  4.  Quality;  disposition.  5.  Thoughts; 
sentiments.  6.  Opinion.  7.  Memory;  remembrance; 
recollections." 

I  sought  further  light  from  two  more  entries. 

"Intellectual, — Relating  to  the  understand- 
ing." 

"  Understanding. — Intellectual  powers." 

It  was  another  recurring  decimal  In  words.  Intel- 
lectual meant  relating  to  the  Intellectual  powers. 

And  yet  understanding  is  one  of  those  words  that 
explain  themselves.  Like  the  Swedish  forsta,  which 
is  still  found  In  some  parts  of  England  as  forestand, 
it  tells  Its  own  story.  A  picture  of  Leighton's  shows 
It  to  the  eye.  A  man  Is  teaching  a  boy  the  use  of 
the  bow.  He  leans  over  the  boy  from  behind,  grasp- 
ing the  boy's  hands  In  his,  and  guiding  them  while 
the  bow  is  drawn.  That  boy  Is  understanding  how 
to  draw  a  bow. 

When  we  have  got  as  far  as  that  we  need  go  no 
further.  We  have  got  to  the  mixture.  Words  of 
this  kind  are  on  the  same  footing  as  the  names  of 
things  outside  us.  They  are  the  names  of  actions, — 
I  will  call  them  play  words.  When  we  have  seen  the 
play,  the  word  has  served  its  office. 

One  more  example  of  lexicography  and  I  must 


Lexicography:  The  Play  upon  Words      67 

leave  Doctor  Latham  swimming  round  and  round 
for  ever  in  his  Mediterranean  maelstrom. 

One  of  his  explanations  of  mind  was  thoughts. 
And  this  was  his  explanation  of  thought. 

"Thought. — Operation  of  the  mind;  idea;  im- 
age formed  in  the  mind." 

And  so  at  the  end  of  my  effort  to  learn  from  him 
the  meaning  of  the  word  idea,  he  had  brought  me 
back  to  the  starting  point. 

I  put  the  two  last  explanations  together,  and  they 
gave  me  an  equation,  the  like  of  which  perhaps  is 
not  in  human  language. 

Mind=thoughts. 

Thought=image   formed  In  the  mind. 

Mind— images  formed  in  the  images  formed  in  the 
images  formed  in  the 

III 

It  Is  time  to  return  to  the  doctrine  of  Idealism. 

"The  stones  and  trees  of  the  outside  world  are 
themselves,  less  on  the  strength  of  any  stuff  of  their 
own  than  through  the  play  of  the  mind,  in  which 
they  stand  forth  as" — (recurring  decimal). 

That  is  to  say,  the  stones  and  trees  outside  u§  are 
really  not  outside  us,  but  inside  us.  They  are  not 
things,  but  thoughts.     A  wit  has  put  it  still  more 


68  The  New  Word 

wittily, — "The  universe  is  a   thought,   and  I   am 
thinking  it." 

This  doctrine,  or  this  play  upon  words,  was  in- 
vented by  Bishop  Berkeley  In  order  to  confound 
the  atheists,  a  class  of  men  who,  It  may  be  suspected, 
are  what  they  are,  less  on  the  strength  of  any  ma- 
terialism of  their  own  than  through  the  working  of 
the  reverent  mind,  in  which  they  exist  as  bogeys. 

It  IS  impossible  to  refuse  to  Berkeley  the  admira- 
tion due  to  the  man  who  has  said  the  last  word  in  his 
own  department.  His  doctrine  Is  the  perfection  of 
metaphysics,  if  It  be  not  a  parody  on  metaphysics. 
Nobody  has  ever  refuted  it;  and  nobody  has  ever 
believed  It. 

Berkeley  himself  of  course  did  not  believe  It,  be- 
cause It  Is  evidently  an  Inverted  pantheism,  with 
oneself  as  the  creator;  and  Berkeley  was  a  deeply 
religious  man.  There  is  no  record  of  any  atheist 
who  was  ever  confounded  by  It.  And  that  is  the  only 
point  which  we  have  to  consider. 

We  are  freed,  by  the  words  of  the  Will,  from  in- 
quiring whether  this  language,  or  other  language 
like  it.  Is  true  or  false.  We  have  to  ask  the  easier, 
but  much  more  searching,  question,  does  it  materially 
benefit  mankind? 

Every  work  that  runs  counter  to  our  settled  habits 
of  thought  and  speech,  driving  us  to  weigh  the  mean- 
ings of  our  words,  and  question  the  soundness  of 
our  views,  is  of  benefit  to  mankind,  in  so  far  as  it 


Lexicography :  The  Play  upon  Words      69 

tends  to  break  up  those  lumps  and  knots  in  the 
mind  which  are  called  prejudices,  and  which  hinder 
us  from  thinking  and  speaking  truly.  In  so  far  as 
Berkeley's  book  did  that,  or  does  that,  it  is  a  good 
book.  But  apart  from  that  it  seems  to  have  no 
tendency  whatever.  It  is  like  the  famous  English 
Act  of  Parliament  the  only  effect  of  which  was  to  add 
three  words  to  ev^ery  conveyance.  An  idealist,  in 
Doctor  Latham's  sense  of  the  word,  instead  of  saying 
to  his  gardener, — "  Gardener,  plant  that  rose-tree  in 
this  bed,"  would  have  to  say, — ^''  Perception  of  a 
gardener,  plant  that  perception  of  a  rose-tree  in 
this  perception  of  a  bed."  The  doctrine  leaves  us 
where  it  found  us.  If  some  of  our  thoughts  pretend 
to  be  stones  and  trees,  and  are  called  stones  and  trees 
in  consequence,  how  can  it  benefit  mankind  to  call 
them  anything  else? 

The  question  is  whether  this  doctrine  has  borne 
fruits.  Who  has  believed  it,  and  been  the  better 
for  believing  it?  Berkeley  himself  refused  to  be 
translated  from  a  poor  bishoprick  to  a  rich  one.  If 
he  had  been  asked  if  this  was  because  he  did  not 
believe  In  the  existence  of  Matter,  he  would  have 
answered  no,  but  because  he  believed  in  the  Gospel. 

There  is  an  older  doctrine  of  which  this  idealism 
seems  to  be  the  insubstantial  ghost.  A  greater  than 
Berkeley  once  taught  that  all  the  material  world  was 
illusion — Maya.  But  In  the  mouth  of  the  Buddha 
that  teaching  was  not  a  clever  paradox;  It  was  a 
living  truth  by  seizing  on  which  men  might  win  their 


70  The  New  Word 

way  out  of  sorrow.  It  was  not  a  metaphysical  doc- 
trine, but  a  practical  rule  of  behaviour; — Set  not 
thy  heart  on  the  things  of  this  world,  for  they  are 
vain. 

And  yet  I  am  not  sure  that  even  the  teaching  of 
the  Buddha  was  of  an  idealist  tendency,  within  the 
meaning  of  this  Will. 

IV 

Latham,  one  sees,  has  faithfully  explained  the  word 
Idealism,  as  a  technical  term  in  use  among  meta- 
physicians and  moral  philosophers.  That  the  word 
stood  for  anything  besides  the  mock  scepticism  of 
Berkeley;  that  it  had  passed  into  common  use  with 
a  meaning  almost  the  opposite  of  scepticism;  he 
evidently  did  not  know.  Indeed,  as  we  have  seen, 
he  had  never  met  with  it  as  an  adjective  at  all. 

What  is  more  strange  is  that  he  should  have  over- 
looked an  older  sort  of  Idealism,  familiar  in  meta« 
physical  and  moral-philosophical  writing  long  before 
Berkeley's  day;  the  Idealism  of  Plato,  father  of  all 
such  as  work  in  metaphysics,  and  patentee  of  the 
metaphysical  Idea. 

There  are  two  Platos;  one  the  companion  of 
Socrates,  walking  in  the  market-place  with  his  master, 
and  showing  us  as  in  a  stage  play  how  the  great 
truth-seeker  pierced  his  way  through  cunning  webs 
of  words;  the  other  the  teacher  in  the  Academy, 
weaving  his  own  webs,  and  decorating  them  with 


Lexicography :  The  Play  upon  Words      71 

his  master's  name.  It  is  to  the  second  Plato  that  we 
owe  the  doctrine  of  Ideas. 

Let  me  see  if  I  can  state  it  in  words  as  homely  as 
those  of  Socrates. 

The  doctrine  of  the  first  Plato,  or  rather  of  his 
master  Socrates,  the  verihood  underlying  the  early 
dialogues,  which  they  lead  towards,  even  if  they  do 
not  openly  declare  it,  comes  to  this.  We  give  ex- 
pression to  our  likes  and  dislikes  by  such  words  as 
nice,  nasty,  good  and  evil.  When  we  write  such 
words  a  little  differently,  as  Niccness,  Nastiness, 
The  Good  and  The  Evil,  we  do  not  change  their 
nature  because  we  have  changed  their  spelling.  They 
have  not  ceased  to  be  the  names  of  our  own  feelings, 
and  become  something  else,  merely  because  we  want 
to  use  them  as  nouns  instead  of  adjectives.  We  have 
not  created  a  mixture  by  creating  a  name.  The  words 
in  their  new  shape  are  shorthand  words,  by  whose 
use  we  can  say  what  we  want  to  say  more  quickly. 
By  The  Good  we  mean  that  which  all  men  deem 
good,  or  rather  that  which  we  think  all  men  ought 
to  deem  good, — for  all  men  do  not  worship  the 
same  God. 

The  doctrine  of  the  second  Plato  is  the  first  doc- 
trine read  backwards,  as  the  Devil-worshippers  used 
to  read  the  Lord's  Prayer.  It  is  that  the  adjectives 
come  from  the  nouns,  and  not  the  nouns  from  the 
adjectives.  Niceness  and  Nastiness,  The  Good  and 
The  Evil,  are  not  the  names  of  thoughts  inside  us, 
but  of  thoughts  outside  us;  perhaps  the  Thoughts  of 


72  The  New  Word 

an    eternal    Thinker,    of   which    our    thoughts    are 
copies. 

Here  is  at  least  an  Idealism  of  a  more  Idealist 
tendency  than  Berkeley's.  Perhaps  were  Plato 
writing  now,  he  could  not  fairly  be  refused  the  Nobel 
Prize.  Tried  by  the  test  of  ontology,  however,  his 
teaching  is  imperfect.  For  the  electric  current  in- 
duced by  a  Current  outside,  goes  the  other  way. 
And  so  we  find  the  real  Thoughts  outside  us  stir 
up  thoughts  within  us  not  in  sympathy,  but  in  antag- 
onism. The  cruelty  of  Nature  teaches  us,  not  to 
be  cruel,  but  to;  be  kind.  Her  carelessness  makes  us 
careful.  Her  hardship  leads  us  toward  luxury.  Her 
riddles  give  birth  to  our  science.  And  so  through- 
out life  necessity  answers  to  necessity.  The  Picts 
draw  their  conversion  on  themselves.  The  king  Is 
man's  reply  to  anarchy;  Christianity  is  his  reply  to 
Caesar;  peace  Is  his  reply  to  war;  the  Idealist  is  his 
reply  to  Materialism.  He  turns  leaf  after  leaf  of 
the  great  Lesson-Book,  and  the  word  Finis  Is  not  on 
any  one. 


There  Is  another  test,  and  a  very  practical  and 
memorable  test,  under  which  Plato  breaks  down. 

In  the  year  1474  a  remarkable  sight  was  to  be 
seen  In  all  the  public  libraries  of  France;  the  sight 
of  books  in  chains.  A  controversy  had  been  carried 
on  between  two  parties,  calling  themselves  Nominal- 


Lexicography :  The  Play  upon  Words      73 

ists  and  Realists,  and  now  the  writings  of  the  Nomi- 
nalists had  been  placed  in  iron  chains  by  order  of 
King  Louis  XI,  at  the  bidding  of  Pope  John  XXIII, 
to  keep  them  out  of  the  hands  of  the  young  student. 

It  seems  to  me  that  there  can  be  no  much  better 
test  than  that,  of  whether  a  work  is  of  an  idealist 
tendency.  When  I  see  a  book  in  chains,  and  when 
I  know  that  the  chains  have  been  placed  on  it  by 
a  king  at  the  bidding  of  a  pope,  that  is  enough  for 
me.  I  do  not  need  to  open  it  to  be  sure  that  it  is 
worthy  of  the  Nobel  Prize. 

And  what  was  it  that  these  fettered  books  taught? 
What  was  the  heresy  of  the  Nominalists?  It  was 
that  of  Socrates  over  again  in  another  form.  It  was 
that  names  are  not  things;  that  shorthand  does  not 
say  more  than  longhand,  that  when,  instead  of  think- 
ing of  men  one  by  one,  you  think  of  all  of  them  at 
once,  and  call  your  thought  humanity,  you  have 
merely  added  a  new  word  to  the  dictionary,  and  not 
a  new  thing  to  the  contents  of  the  universe. 

Such  was  the  doctrine  that  alarmed  a  Roman  Pope, 
and  not  without  good  reason;  for  the  Nominalists  of 
that  generation  became  the  Reformers  of  the  next. 
Nor  is  Pope  John  XXIII  yet  dead,  neither  have  all 
the  chains  yet  been  taken  off.  I  have  myself  found 
the  very  harmless  essays  of  the  late  Professor  Huxley 
under  lock  and  key  in  a  so-called  Free  Library. 

Judged  by  this  test  a  work  of  an  idealist  tendency 
must  be  a  work  that  some  one  will  want  to  put  in 
iron  chains. 


FIFTH  HEAD 


THE  HOUSE  OF  CARDS 

Metaphysics. — i.  Direction  to  the  Binder. — 2.  Hoax 
of  Andronicus  Rhodius. — 3.  The  Magic  Song. — 4.  Pure 
Reason  and  Practical  Reason. — 5.  The  Annex  of,  the 
Universe. 

TDEALISM,  as  defined  by  the  dictionary,  the 
•*•  Idealism  of  the  schools,  the  Idealism  that  is 
spelt  with  a  capital  I,  is  a  system  of  metaphysical 
philosophy.  Those  are  the  words  with  which 
Latham  begins  his  explanation.  And  the  issue  that 
they  raise  is  one  that  cannot  be  escaped.  Did  the 
Testator  use  the  word  idealist  in  the  technical  sense 
of  the  professors?  Did  he  intend  this  Prize  for  sys- 
tems of  metaphysical  philosophy? 

Berkeleyism  did  not  end  with  Berkeley.  His  doc- 
trine, or  his  language,  was  taken  up  by  greater  men. 
It  was  the  greatest  of  them,  Kant,  who  really  stamped 
the  word  Idealism  with  this  sense,  and  gave  it  cur- 
rency. Since  his  time  the  term  has  almost  replaced 
the  term  metaphysical.  Among  modern  metaphysi- 
cians, Idealism  is  your  only  wear. 

I  have  already  said  that  Nobel's  bequest  seems  to 
me  a  challenge  to  this  sort  of  idealism,  that  is  to 
say,  a  challenge  to  the  science  or  mystery  of  Meta- 
physics.    Brought  face  to  face  with  this  word  in 

74 


'Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards       75 

Doctor  Latham's  explanation  of  idealism,  I  felt  I 
had  no  choice  but  to  examine  It. 


I 


I  approached  this  famous  word  with  not  a  little 
dread,  arising  partly  from  my  want  of  skill  in  Medi- 
terranean languages,  and  partly  from  a  well-known 
incident  in  its  recent  history. 

In  the  last  century  there  was  formed  in  London  a 
private  debating  club  under  the  name  of  the  Meta- 
physical Society.  Its  members  were  some  of  the 
ablest  men  of  their  generation,  Tennyson  the  poet, 
Gladstone  the  statesman,  Spencer  the  philosopher, 
Manning  the  churchman,  Huxley  the  scientist.  These 
distinguished  men  met  and  talked  together  for  ten 
years,  and  at  the  end  of  that  time  they  broke  up 
the  society,  because,  as  one  of  them  said,  they  had 
not  yet  agreed  on  the  meaning  of  the  word  meta- 
physics. 

I  was  not  rash  enough  to  hope  I  could  succeed 
where  such  distinguished  men  had  failed,  but  I  was 
happy  In  the  knowledge  that  I  had  not  so  hard  a 
task  as  theirs.  They  had  sought  for  a  definition 
of  metaphysics;  I  wanted  merely  a  working  sense, 
a  sense  that  would  enable  me  to  judge  if  a  meta- 
physical work  came  within  the  meaning  of  the 
Testator. 

The  word  was  Greek,  to  all  appearance,  but,  like 


76  The  New  Word 

idealist,  it  turned  out  to  be  one  of  those  Greek  words 
which  the  Greeks  themselves  were  never  fortunate 
enough  to  know.  In  the  lexicon  I  could  find  only 
its  two  pieces,  meta  and  phusikos. 

Phusikos  did  not  seem  a  word  hard  to  translate. 
Natural,  native,  begotten,  born — such  were  the  mean- 
ings offered  me  by  the  Greek  lexicon.  But  metay 
on  the  other  hand,  proved  to  have  the  most  variable 
meanings  of  any  word  I  have  ever  met.  It  meant  al- 
most everything  from  inside  to  outside.  With  noth- 
ing but  the  Greek  words  to  help  me  I  might  have 
groped  for  -ever  for  the  meaning  of  metaphysics 
among  words  like  supernatural  and  unnatural,  after- 
birth and  unborn. 

I  do  not  know  how  far  it  is  the  case  in  other  lan- 
guages, but  in  English,  words  like  physical,  ma- 
terial, real,  natural  and  sensible  all  ring  well;  they 
suggest  the  true  and  useful.  Whereas  words  like 
immaterial,  unreal,  unnatural  and  senseless  all  ring 
badly;  they  suggest  the  false  and  foolish.  The 
prejudice  against  the  study  of  metaphysics  in  Eng- 
lish-speaking countries  attaches  to  the  very  name 
of  the  science,  which  is,  as  nearly  as  I  could  make 
out,  in  the  vulgar  tongue — nonsense. 

I  was  obliged  to  go  once  more  to  Doctor  Latham, 
this  time  with  the  most  encouraging  result.  For 
after  explaining  the  word  as  "ontology,  or  the 
science  of  the  affections  of  being  in  general,"  and 
adding  that  the  science  in  question  was  generally 
branded  as  an  impossible  one,  he  showed  me  that 


Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards       77 

metaphysics  is  one  of  the  few  words  whose  beginning 
is  known, 

I  shall  have  written  most  of  the  foregoing  pages 
in  vain  if  there  is  any  need  for  me  to  insist  on  the 
difference  this  made  to  me.  That  the  word  was  a 
Babu  formation  would  matter  no  more  than  it  had 
mattered  in  the  case  of  dynamite,  as  soon  as  I  could 
come  to  the  mixture. 

I  quote  Doctor  Latham's  authority,  a  distinguished 
writer  on  metaphysics,  named  Mansel. 

"The  term  metaphysics,  though  originally  em- 
ployed to  designate  a  treatise  of  Aristotle,  was  prob- 
ably unknown  to  the  philosopher  himself.  On  the 
whole  the  weight  of  evidence  appears  to  be  in  favour 
of  the  supposition  which  attributes  the  inscription 
ta  meta  ta  phusika  to  Andronicus  Rhodius,  the  first 
editor  of  Aristotle's  collected  works." 

Andronicus  Rhodius,  it  appears,  like  Columbus, 
added  a  new  continent  to  the  realms  of  knowledge 
by  accident. 

"The  title,  as  given  to  the  writings  on  the  first 
philosophy,  probably  indicates  only  their  place  in 
the  collection  as  coming  after  the  physical  treatises 
of  the  author." 

And  thus  we  see  the  word  came  into  being  as  a 
direction  to  the  binder. — The  question  is  whether  it 
has  ever  become  anything  more? 


yS  The  New  Word 


II 


Among  the  wonderful  beliefs  of  those  old  heathen 
men  who,  guessing  where  we  count  and  measure, 
prophesied  of  all  the  lore  to  come,  is  none  more  won- 
derful than  that  which  shines  through  the  magic 
song  of  the  Finns,  the  belief  in  the  creative  power 
of  the  uttered  word.  What  else  is  the  story  of 
Andronikos  of  Rhodes?  He  uttered,  all  un- 
wittingly, his  wizard  spell;  and  lol  Professors  of 
Metaphysics  in  all  the  Roman  universities  of  Europe 
and  America. 

What,  then,  is  the  mixture  of  which  Aristotle's 
editor  furnished  only  the  name?  What  is  it  that 
the  professors  have  been  professing  for  two  thousand 
years  ? 

If  I  turn  for  an  answer  to  this  question  to  a  popu- 
lar work  of  reference,  like  the  Encyclopaedia  Bri- 
tannica,  I  find  that  the  official  teachers  of  the  science 
of  Andronicus  Rhodius  have  been  no  more  able  to 
agree  among  themselves  than  the  members  of  the 
Metaphysical  Society.  The  history  of  metaphysics  is 
the  history  of  the  attempt  to  supply  a  mixture  to  fit 
the  name.  The  enchanted  squirrels  have  toiled  in  the 
sorcerer's  cage.  They  have  written  whole  learned 
libraries;  the  Mediterranean  words  have  gone  round 
and  round  in  imposing  procession;  but  the  writers 
have  not  gained  an  inch. 


Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards       79 


III 


Wherein  lies  the  mesmeric  power  of  these  Babu 
words  ?  It  Is  sheer  repetition.  By  dint  of  saying 
them  over  and  over  again  we  make  ourselves  believe 
in  them.  Repetition  is  the  secret  of  all  enchant- 
ment. We  find  it  in  the  magic  spells  buried  beneath 
the  dust  of  Akkad.  We  meet  it  in  the  lullaby  that 
puts  the  child  to  sleep. 

The  learned  Latham  can  suggest  no  parent  for  the 
word  lull.  No  doubt  the  monks  forgot  to  latinise  it; 
— it  does  not  happen  to  be  found  in  any  Anglo- 
Saxon  manuscript.  Meanwhile  it  is  a  word  whose 
roots  go  down  into  the  deepest  soil  of  speech.  It 
is,  of  course,  the  Swedish  lidla, — laulii,  the  Finland 
word  for  song.  It  is  of  kin  to  the  word  lay,  also 
a  song.  It  looks  at  us  out  of  the  Roman  legend. 
The  Greek  word  lego  meant  to  lull  to  sleep.  It  hides 
in  words  like  logic  and  religion, — nay,  in  lexicog- 
raphy !  It  is  the  core  of  the  word  language.  Per- 
haps it  is  the  oldest  and  most  widespread  word  that 
men  have  ever  framed  their  lips  to  say. 

There  is  only  one  way  to  break  the  spell,  and  that 
is  to  stop  the  magic  song.  We  must  interrupt  the 
Mediterranean  sorcerer,  and  ask  him  what  he  is  say- 
ing.    We  must  translate  the  Babu  words. 

One  thing  is  clear  already  about  the  word  meta- 
physics. The  prime  enchanter,  Andronicus  Rhodius, 
used  meta  in  the  sense  of  after,  and  not  among.    If 


8o  The  New  Word 

physics  be  the  science  of  nature,  then  metaphysics 
should  be  the  science  of  whatever  is  outside  nature. 

And  so,  Indeed,  the  long  toil  of  the  metaphysicians 
has  been  a  struggle  to  get  out  of  the  natural  world, 
by  getting  inside  themselves.  And  Inside  themselves 
they  have  found  what  they  call  The  Mind,  and  In 
this  very  mind  they  have  found  the  objects  of  the 
external  world,  the  stones  and  trees,  in  short,  nature 
all  over  again. 

IV 

Now  there  may  be  a  real  science  of  mind.  The 
study  of  how  men  think  and  reason  ought  to  be  the 
crowning  study,  the  last  word  in  any  education 
worth  the  name,  the  last  chapter  of  any  but  a  par- 
rot's grammar-book.  But  just  because  it  Is  the 
crowning  study  it  must  rest  on  all  the  others.  It  Is 
as  natural  as  they  are.  And  like  them  it  must  fol- 
low Bacon's  rule — Learn  from  the  things,  and  not 
from  the  words  about  the  things. 

I  have  likened  the  mind  to  a  tree  whose  roots  are 
feelings  and  whose  leaves  are  words.  The  followers 
of  Andronicus  Rhodius  have  tried  to  learn  about  It 
only  from  the  leaves.  They  have  considered  the 
mind  (much  as  the  philologists  have  considered 
words)  as  a  cut  flower,  picked  from  somewhere  out- 
side the  universe,  and  stuck  inside  us.  They  have 
studied  only  the  leaves,  and  so  they  have  not  thor- 
oughly understood  even  the  leaves.   Thev  have  used 


Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards       8i 

shorthand  by  mistake   for  longhand.     They    have 
dealt  in  names  to  which  there  was  no  mixture. 

The  last  great  name  among  the  slaves  of  this  en- 
chantment, the  last  great  fore-Darwinian  thinker,  is 
Kant.  His  admirers  tell  us — (I  am  copying  Carlyle) 
— that  the  grand  characteristic  of  his  philosophy  is 
his  distinction  between  the  Understanding  and  the 
Reason — Verstand  and  Vernunft.  Reason  discerns 
truth  itself,  Absolute  Truth,  while  Understanding 
discerns  only  relations.  Relative  Truth.  Understand- 
ing is  confined  to  material  knowledge,  and  the  prac- 
tical issues  of  dally  life  ;  and  It  breaks  down  in  the 
attempt  to  prove  there  is  a  God.  That  is  a  task 
reserved  for  Reason,  which  alone  is  able  to  deal  with 
spiritual  things. 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  Andronican  science  at 
its  best;  this  is  the  grand  result  of  studying  the  mind 
upside  down.    Let  us  see  what  the  words  mean. 

I  will  not  be  too  curious  about  the  German,  though 
I  have  my  own  doubts  as  to  whether  Vernunft  has 
anything  to  do  with  Reason.  With  the  Dutch,  who 
spell  it  vernuft,  It  stands  for  wit,  skill,  genius;  while 
one  of  my  Swedish  word-books  translates  Reason  by 
both  of  Kant's  words — formift  and  forstand. 

The  English  words  arc  fortunately  as  plain  as 
words  can  be.  We  have  seen  already  that  under- 
standing Is  simply  a  closer  kind  of  watching;  it  is 
to  learn  by  following  what  is  going  on,  and  so  keep- 
ing It  in  mind.  Reason  is  a  book  word,  it  is  the 
French  raison,  the  Latin  ratio.     But  it  is  only  a 


82  The  New  Word 

glorified  counting.    The  folk  word  for  It  Is  reckon- 
ing, the  Swedish  rakning. 

What  Andronlcan  science  has  achieved  has  been 
to  exchange  the  meanings  of  these  plain  words.  It 
Is  Understanding  that  discerns  things  by  themselves, 
the  Absolute,  and  Reason  that  discerns  relations,  or, 
In  homelier  words,  puts  two  and  two  together.  Shall 
I  confess  that  I  think  both  words  are  better  used  by 
a  forgotten  poet  writing  on  the  Immortality  of  the 
soul : — 

"  When  she  rates  things,  and  moves  from  ground  to 
ground, 

The  name  of  reason  she  obtains  by  this: 
But  when  by  reason  she  the  truth  hath  found, 

And  standeth  fast,  she  understanding  is." 

Here  Is  a  writer  who  has  stopped  to  ask  himself 
the  meaning  of  the  words  he  used.  He  does  not 
talk  as  though  reason  were  one  thing,  and  under- 
standing another  Independent  thing.  He  sees  that 
both  are  only  names  for  the  same  Inner  power,  called 
reason  while  she  does  her  sum,  and  understanding 
while  she  sets  down  the  amount. 

And  after  all.  It  was  Kant  who  called  In  Practical 
Reason  to  do  the  very  thing  that  the  poor  practical 
Understanding  was  forbidden  to  do,  and  the  Pure 
Reason  had  failed  to  do,  namely  to  prove  there  Is  a 
God.  The  fool  who  said  In  his  heart,  There  Is  no 
God,  would  have  felt  proud  If  he  had  lived  to  read 
the  Kritik  der  re'inen  Vernunft. 


Metaphysics:  The  House  of  Cards       83 


In  our  time  it  has  become  plain  that  all  that  kind 
of  thing  must  go  to  the  scrap-heap  whither  Des- 
cartes and  Bacon  swept  the  rubbish  of  the  medieval 
schoolmen.  To-day,  if  we  wish  to  learn  anything 
about  the  mind,  we  begin  by  looking  at  the  brain; 
we  interpret  words  by  feelings,  and  feelings  by 
words;  we  watch  the  savage  and  the  child  as  they 
begin  to  think  and  talk;  we  follow  what  is  going  on 
in  nature,  instead  of  trying  to  turn  our  backs  on 
it;  and  so  we  make  some  little  headway. 

But  we  no  longer  call  that  study  metaphysics.  We 
call  it  Mind-lore,  or,  in  Babu,  Psychology. 

For  my  part  I  have  never  been  constrained  to 
enter  the  revolving  cage.  I  have  a  shield  that 
shivers  the  enchanted  weapons.  It  is  my  ignorance 
of  the  Babu  tongue.  As  soon  as  I  look  at  the  An- 
dronican  hieroglyphs  they  change  their  shapes,  and 
shrink  down  into  the  poor  common  words  of  daily 
life.  That  sublime  pair  of  twins,  subjective  and 
objective,  dwindle  down  to  inside  and  outside;  that 
mysterious  consciousness  shrivels  into  mere  wakeful- 
ness; that  pompous  Ego  is  nothing  better  than  my- 
self,— and  so  the  glittering  Aladdin's  palace  melts 
before  my  eyes — 

"And  like  an  unsubstantial   pageant   faded, 
Leaves  not  a  rack  behind." 


84  The  New  Word 

In  a  French  town  I  once  saw  a  hotel  called 
L'Univers,  and  over  against  it  a  building  with  the 
sign — Annexe  de  I'Unh-ers.  I  know  the  architect 
of  that  building.  His  name  is  Andronikos  of 
Rhodes. 

And  it  is  a  house  of  cards. 


SIXTH   HEAD 


THE  FACE  IN  THE  LOOKING-GLASS 

Public  Opinion. — I.  A  Disciple  of  Tolstoy. — 2.  Strong 
Language  about  Humanity. — 3.  Brotherhood  and  Bombs. 
— 4.    Man  his  own  God. 

AS  soon  as  I  found   that  I  could   not  learn  the 

meaning  of  the  Testator's  word  from  lexicons, 

I  did  what  lexicographers  are  too  proud  to  do;  I 

went  out  into  the  streets  to  find  out  how  the  word 

was  being  used  from  day  to  day. 

I  questioned  men  of  many  divers  minds  and  occupa- 
tions, I  questioned  the  poet,  the  lawyer  and  the 
journalist,  and  from  no  two  did  I  receive  the  same 
explanation.  Some  answered  readily,  others  hesitat- 
ingly, but  only  one  was  wise  enough  to  use  the  words 
— "  I  do  not  know." 

In  the  light  that  we  have  gained  already  it  will  be 
worth  while  to  look  again  at  these  replies.  And  I 
have  not  invented  them. — 

"  Something  to  do  with  the  imaginative  powers." 

"  Fanatical." 

"Altruistic." 

"  Not  practical." 

"Exact." 

"  Poetical." 

"  Intangible." 

85 


86  The  New  Word 

"  Sentimental." 

"True." 

"That  which  cannot  be  proved." 

"The  opposite  to  materialistic." 


I 


The  only  one  who  showed  confidence  in  his  answer 
was  the  altruist.  Partly  on  that  account,  and  partly 
because  I  had  heard  of  altruism  before,  and  did  not 
know  that  it  might  not  be  what  the  Testator  had  in 
mind,  I  set  myself  to  look  into  this  word. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  friend  who  gave 
me  this  explanation  was  one  of  those  ignorant  fanatics 
who  mask  their  envy  of  the  rich  under  high-sounding 
words  like  Humanity  and  Brotherhood.  My  friend 
was  a  man  of  education,  in  the  front  rank  of  his 
profession  as  a  barrister,  with  every  prospect  of 
becoming  a  judge.  He  had  a  house  in  a  London 
square,  and  a  villa  on  the  Riviera  ;  he  drove  a  car- 
riage and  pair,  and  was  a  connoisseur  in  champagne 
and  cigars.  Evidently  such  a  man  had  nothing  to 
gain,  and  very  much  to  lose,  by  embracing  the  re- 
ligion of  unselfishness;  so  that  I  was  able  to  learn 
from  him  as  from  one  who  was  transparently  sincere 
in  his  belief. 

I  began  by  putting  my  question  in  a  more  practical 
form. 

"  Suppose  I  should  wish  to  write  a  work  of  an 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     87 

idealist  tendency,  what  would  such  a  book  have  to 
be  like,  in  your  opinion?" 

"  I  have  told  you.  It  must  be  of  an  altruistic 
tendency.     It  must  preach  unselfishness." 

Here  was  a  word  I  could  not  quarrel  with.  If  I 
do  not  understand  the  word  self,  I  shall  never  under- 
stand any  word.  The  ground  was  becoming  firm 
under  my  feet.    I  said  to  my  friend, — 

"  I  want  to  be  very  clear.  When  you  say  that, 
you  don't  mean  that  I  need  write  unselfishly, — for 
instance,  against  my  own  opinions?" 

My  friend  smiled  good-naturedly. 

"Now  you  are  quibbling.  You  know  very  well 
what  I  mean.  You  must  write  against  greed  and 
cruelty  and  lust — against  selfishness  in  every  form." 

I  felt  a  little  disappointed. 

"  I  am  afraid  you  will  think  me  very  stupid  ;  but 
do  you  mean  that  any  book  that  writes  against  these 
things  is  altruistic  ?  " 

"  Certainly,  "  my  friend  said  ;  but  It  seemed  to  me 
that  he  did  not  say  it  as  If  he  felt  quite  certain. 

"  But,  then,  let  me  see  If  I  understand  you.  I 
have  never  read  any  book  that  did  not  write  against 
the  things  you  speak  of.  The  newspapers  write 
against  them  every  day.  I  have  never  seen  any 
book  that  praised  greed  and  cruelty  and  lust.  Do 
you  mean  that  all  literature  is  of  an  idealistic  tend- 
ency ?  " 

My  friend  shook  his  head. 

"  You  go  too  fast.    Altruism  Is  a  great  principle. 


88  The  New  Word 

the  principle  that  man  is  born  to  serve  his  fellow 
men.  The  question  is  whether  a  book  asserts  that 
principle.  Read  Tolstoy's  works,  and  you  will  under- 
stand what  I  mean.  He  is  our  greatest  idealist  to- 
day." 

This  answer  was  all  that  I  could  have  asked  for. 
At  last  I  had  got  from  the  name  to  the  mixture. 
My  friend  had  done  what  the  Testator  has  failed 
to  do,  he  had  pointed  out  a  work  of  an  idealist  tend- 
ency. The  only  question  left  was  whether  he  had 
pointed  out  the  right  one. 

I  tried  to  recall  the  tendency  of  Count  Tolstoy's 
works. 

"  You  would  say,  then,  that  I  must  write  against 
war  ?  and  government  ?  and  money  ?  and  reli- 
gion ?— -  " 

My  friend  had  nodded  his  approval  so  far,  but  he 
stopped  me  at  the  word  religion. 

"No,  no;  it  is  the  Religion  of  Humanity  that 
Tolstoy  preaches.  The  Service  of  Man.  That  is 
altruism." 

I  considered  this  explanation  carefully. 

"  When  you  say  that,  do  you  mean  to  leave  out 
the  animals  ?  I  have  read  a  story  of  the  Buddha 
giving  a  piece  of  his  flesh  to  feed  a  starving  tigress. 
Should  you  not  call  that  altruism  ?  " 

*'  That  is  carrying  the  thing  to  absurdity.  Tolstoy 
never  does  that.     Man  comes  before  the  beasts." 

"  All  men  ?  Or  do  white  men  come  before  black 
men  ?  " 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     89 

This  time  my  friend  became  eloquent. 

"All  men.  Once  you  begin  to  draw  distinctions 
you  will  end  In  race-feeling,  and  the  blatant  militar- 
ism of  our  own  day.  That  Is  the  very  thing  that 
Tolstoy  fights  against.  He  recognises  no  distinction 
between  one  man  and  another,  from  the  Tsar  on 
his  throne  to  the  lowest  creature  with  the  form  of 
man." 

It  was  an  ungrateful  task  to  resist  my  friend's 
enthusiasm,  but  I  ventured  to  put  another  question. 

"  I  am  almost  ashamed  to  ask  ;  but  when  you  say 
'  no  distinction,'  perhaps  you  don't  mean  that  Tolstoy 
draws  no  distinction  between  good  men  and 
bad?" 

*'  Of  course  not.  But  he  shows  that  we  must  love 
them  all  alike." 

The  word  love  always  sounds  to  me  a  little  vague. 
I  was  obliged  to  press  my  friend  still  further. 

"  Well,  but  suppose  the  Tsar  were  a  bad  man,  who 
wanted  to  oppress  the  Russian  people,  would  not 
Tolstoy  be  on  their  side  rather  than  on  his  ?  " 

"  Certainly.  Oppression  is  just  what  he  is  opposed 
to  most, — the  oppression  of  one  man  by  another, 
whether  he  be  Tsar  or  peasant." 

"Then  If  the  peasants  should  want  to  oppress 
anybody,  Tolstoy  would  be  opposed  to  them  ?  " 

"That  is  what  I  have  said." 

"Then  let  me  see  If  I  follow  you  rightly.  Sup- 
pose the  peasants  should  cease  paying  taxes,  and 
thereby  throw  the  taxgatherersoutof  work,  or  refuse 


90  The  New  Word 

to  fire  on  the  enemy,  and  thereby  expose  their  officers 
to  disgrace  and  capture,  would  that  be  oppression  ?  " 

"No,  because  those  classes  have  no  moral  right 
to  do  what  they  are  doing.  Their  work  does  not 
benefit  mankind." 

"But  are  not  the  taxgatherers  and  officers  a  part 
of  mankind  ?  Does  not  the  Religion  of  Humanity 
require  us  to  serve  them  ?  " 

"  Not  in  that  way.  You  are  confusing  the  princi- 
ple. Altruism  is  the  service  of  man  as  a  whole,  not 
of  any  one  class.  If  a  particular  class  is  doing  harm 
instead  of  good,  we  ought  not  to  support  it.  By 
doing  so  we  should  injure  mankind." 

"  I  think  I  see  what  you  mean.  We  ought  to  serve 
those  who  are  serving  mankind,  rather  than  those 
who  are  injuring  mankind  ?" 

"  Yes,  that  is  the  whole  point." 

"  By  '  we '  do  you  mean  everybody  ?  All  man- 
kind?" 

"  What  else  could  I  mean  ?  " 

"Then  let  me  see  if  I  have  got  it  right.  Altruism 
is  the  principle  that  mankind  ought  to  serve  those 
who  are  serving  it,  but  not  those  who  are  not  serv- 
ing it." 

"  If  you  like  to  put  it  that  way,  yes." 

"  It  is  the  principle  of  the  vulgar  saying, — *  You 
scratch  my  back,  and  I'll  scratch  yours'  ?" 

My  friend  began  to  be  a  little  vexed  with  me. 

"You  do  not  seem  to  see  the  difference  between 
the  individual  and  Humanity.     Humanity  is  a  whole. 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     91 

We  cannot  divide  It.     Altruism  Is  the  service  of  the 
whole  by  the  individual." 

I  had  to  recall  those  books  that  were  so  highly  dis- 
tinguished by  Pope  John  XXIII. 

"  But  Is  not  Humanity  made  up  of  Individuals  ? 
Does  not  the  altruist  have  to  serve  men  and  wo- 
men ?  " 

"  Yes,  yes,  of  coxirse  ;  but  all  of  them.  Not  one 
more  than  another.  The  heart  of  the  true  altruist 
overflows  with  lov^e  towards  every  crea.ture,  the 
lowest  as  well  as  the  highest,  the  greatest  criminal  as 
well  as  the  purest  saint." 

"That  is  very  beautiful.  I  think  I  quite  under- 
stand that.  But  you  told  me  that  the  altruist  had 
not  only  to  love  these  different  kinds  of  people,  but 
also  to  serve  them.     Is  that  right  ?  " 

"  Of  course.  He  cannot  love  them  unless  he 
serves  them." 

"  Very  well  ;  then  all  I  want  to  know  is  how  he 
ought  to  serve  them.  Suppose  an  altruist  should 
see  a  soldier  or  a  taxgatherer  beating  a  peasant, 
ought  he  to  stop  him,  or  not  to  stop  him  ?  " 

"  He  ought  to  remonstrate  with  him." 

"  But  suppose  the  remonstrance  has  no  effect. 
Ought  he  to  do  nothing  more  ?  " 

"  He  can  offer  to  take  the  beating  in  the  other's 
place." 

**  But  suppose  the  soldier  says  he  would  rather  go 
on  beating  the  peasant  ?  " 

"Then  he  has  done  all  he  can." 


92  The  New  Word 

"  Then  an  altruist  ought  not  to  use  force  ?  " 

"No.  Force  is  no  remedy.  That  is  Tolstoy's 
great  lesson." 

"Then  an  altruist  is  one  who  will  not  use  force, 
even  to  defend  his  money  from  thieves,  or  his  chil- 
dren from  cruelty  ?  " 

"That  is  the  ideal." 

"And  you,  if  any  one  should  want  to  steal  your 
money,  or  to  beat  your  children,  would  think  it 
wrong  to  prevent  them  ?  " 

"  In  an  ideal  sense,  yes," 

"  Even  though  you  should  know  that  the  man  who 
was  beating  your  children  was  out  of  his  mind  ;  or 
that  he  was  a  good  man  who  had  been  hypnotised 
and  made  to  do  wicked  things  against  his  will  ?  " 

My  friend  laughed  at  me. 

"  Now  you  are  trying  to  make  the  principle  absurd. 
The  Religion  of  Humanity  is  reasonable.  Every  one 
recognises  that  a  madman  should  be  restrained 
from  doing  mischief,  whether  to  himself  only,  or 
to  others." 

"Then  If  a  man  went  mad  and  wanted  to  beat 
you  or  your  children,  or  to  set  fire  to  your  house, 
or  do  any  other  wicked  thing,  you  would  think  it 
right  to  restrain  him  by  force  ?  " 

"  Of  course.  That  is  a  ridiculous  question.  It 
would  be  for  the  good  of  the  man  himself  to  restrain 
him." 

"But  If  he  were  not  mad  ;  If  he  were  only  eccen- 
tric, or  were  behaving  like  that  out  of  superstition, 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     93 

or  spite,  you  would  think  it  wrong  to  restrain  him  by 
force  ?  " 

"All  that  is  a  question  of  degree.  The  test  is  a 
very  simple  one  ; — does  the  man  know  what  he  is 
doing  ?  " 

"  Then  let  me  see  if  I  have  got  it  right  this  time. 
[You  mean  that  if  a  man  is  doing  wicked  things  by 
accident  he  ought  to  be  prevented,  but  not  if  he  is 
doing  them  on  purpose  ?  And  so  an  altruist  is  one 
who  restrains  good  men,  and  lets  wicked  men  do 
what  they  like." 

"That,  "  said  my  friend,  "is  not  putting  it  fairly. 
I  said  that  madmen  ought  to  be  restrained  for  their 
own  sake.  Surely  you  ought  to  be  able  to  see  the 
difference.  When  we  restrain  a  man  for  his  own 
good  we  are  serving  him.     Our  action  is  altruistic." 

"  I  think  I  see  what  you  mean,  this  time.  It  Is 
doing  good  to  a  madman  to  save  him  from  doing 
wicked  things  which  he  might  afterwards  regret  ?  " 

My  friend  smiled,  well  pleased. 

"  Exactly  !     Now  you  understand  me." 

"  But  It  is  not  doing  good  to  a  man  in  his  right 
mind  to  save  him  from  doing  wicked  things  which  he 
might  afterwards  regret." 

My  friend's  face  fell. 

"  No  man  who  wants  to  do  wicked  things  is  really 
in  his  right  mind,"  he  said.  "Tolstoy  has  said  so 
over  and  over  again." 

"Then  I  am  afraid  I  don't  understand  you,"  I 
had  to  confess.     "  I  thought  you  began  by   saying 


94  The  New  Word 

that  the  altruist  ought  not  to  use  force  to  anybody, 
and  now  you  seem  to  be  saying  that  he  ought  to  use 
force  to  everybody  who  is  doing  what  the  altruist 
thinks  is  wrong." 

"AH  that,"  said  my  friend,  "comes  of  pushing 
the  principle  to  extremes.     Altruism  is  an  ideal." 

I  was  obliged  to  shake  my  head  regretfully. 

"  I  came  here  to  ask  you  the  meaning  of  the  word 
idealistic '*  I  remarked,  "  and  you  told  me  that  it 
meant  altruistic.  But  now  in  explaining  to  me  what 
altruism  is,  you  have  three  times  used  the  word  ideal, 
and  each  time  in  the  sense  of  a  foolish  extreme  to 
which  a  good  principle  ought  not  to  be  carried.  And 
altruism  Itself,  as  you  have  explained  It,  seems  to 
me  just  such  a  foolish  extreme  to  which  the  old- 
fashioned  principle  of  kindness,  or  good  will  towards 
men,  ought  not  to  be  carried, — I  am  afraid  that 
what  you  have  been  really  telling  me  all  this  time 
is  that  an  Idealist  work  must  be  a  work  of  an 
extravagant  tendency." 

II 

The  Religion  of  Humanity  Is  being  preached 
among  us  to-day  by  many  well-meaning  men  and 
women,  who  unfortunately  have  never  stopped  to 
ask  themselves  what  they  mean  by  the  words 
Religion  and  Humanity. 

No  one,  I  think,  now  remembers  the  meaning  of 
the  word  religion  ;  and  I  shall  have  to  look  for  it 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     95 

hereafter.  Humanity,  of  course,  Is  the  Babu  for 
Man. 

It  used  to  be  written  man,  and  old-fashioned 
writers  had  some  rather  plain  things  to  say  about  it. 
"All  men  are  liars."  "There  is  none  that  doeth 
good,  no,  not  one."  "  The  heart  of  man  is  deceitful 
above  all  things,  and  desperately  wicked,"  "  It 
repented  the  Lord  that  he  had  made  man."  No  one 
would  dare  to  say  such  things  as  that  about 
Humanity.  For  Humanity  no  words  can  be  too 
good.  The  difference  is  as  great  as  that  between 
a  little  girl  being  scolded  by  her  teacher  in  the 
schoolroom,  when  there  is  no  one  by,  and  the  same 
little  girl  being  praised  by  the  teacher  in  the  parlour, 
when  visitors  are  present. 

The  reason  for  the  change  is  not  far  to  seek. 
Those  well-meaning  men  and  women  have  found 
out  that  the  language  of  the  theologians  is  bad 
language  ;  that  the  v/ord  God  has  become  an 
Andronican  word  to  them  ;  and  so,  being  too 
honest  to  go  on  using  a  word  they  do  not  under- 
stand, they  have  crossed  it  out,  and  looked  for 
another  word  to  write  in  its  place.  And  obeying 
a  natural  law  of  the  mind,  i  which  the  theologians 
call  anthropomorphism,  they  have  written  the  word 
Man.  I  once  knew  a  boy  of  fourteen  who  made  the 
same  discovery,  and  went  through  all  his  childish 
poems,  crossing  out  the  word  God  wherever  it 
occurred  ;  and  he,  too,  wrote  words  like  Man  and 
The  People  in  its  place. 


96  The  New  Word 

In  this  way  they  have  changed  the  Idol,  but,  as 
so  often  happens,  they  have  not  changed  the 
idolatry.  All  the  Andronlcan  words  of  the  theolo- 
gians have  come  back  again,  only  this  time  they  are 
written  about  Man  instead  of  about  God.  All  the 
rich,  comfortable  folks  who  used  to  go  to  church 
and  call  themselves  miserable  sinners,  now  go  to  lec- 
ture halls  and  call  themselves  Lovers  of  Humanity. 
I  think  a  Lover  of  Humanity  is  the  very  last  person 
to  whom,  if  I  were  in  distress,  I  should  go  to 
borrow  a  few  dollars. 


Ill 


Humanity  is  a  deceitful  word,  because  they  who 
use  it  are  apt,  like  Pope  John  XXIII,  and  like  my 
altruistic  friend,  to  forget  that  it  is  only  another  way 
of  saying  men  and  women.  And  like  most  other 
words  of  the  same  class,  it  is  a  dangerous  word,  be- 
cause it  puts  the  mind  to  sleep,  and  steels  those 
who  use  it  to  do  all  kinds  of  cruel  things  they 
would  otherwise  be  ashamed  to  do.  In  such  words 
Rousseau  sowed  the  seed  that  sprang  up  in  the 
Reign  of  Terror.  It  is  like  that  word  Brotherhood, 
on  behalf  of  which  so  many  bombs  have  been 
thrown.  In  the  course  of  my  life  I  have  come 
across  a  good  many  men  and  women  styling  them- 
selves Socialists,  Anarchists,  Friends  of  Humanity, 
and  what  not,  and  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  have 
found  in  practice  that  the  more  of  these  sort  of 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     97 

words  they  used,  and  the  bigger  capitals  they 
spelled  them  with,  the  more  likely  they  were  to  be 
narrow-minded,  bad-tempered  people,  quarrelling 
violently  among  themselves,  and  yet  ready  to  turn 
and  rend  everybody  else  for  not  agreeing  with  the 
things  which  they  were  not  yet  agreed  upon  among 
themselves.  It  has  been  my  lot  to  talk  with  Apostles 
of  Humanity,  with  the  kind  of  men  who  get 
up  Pilgrimages  of  Peace  and  Purity  Crusades. 
(Fancy  a  man  who  does  not  know  the  difference 
between  a  pilgrim  and  a  crusader  talking  about 
Humanity  !)  And  when  I  have  ventured  to  urge 
upon  them  mercy  towards  their  victims,  I  have  seen 
them  foam  at  the  mouth. 

I  distrust  Humanity  when  it  foams  at  the  mouth. 

The  word  Humanity  is  an  Andronican  word, 
because  it  does  not  advance  us  an  inch.  Every  one 
is  agreed  that  it  is  doing  a  kindness  to  save  a  man 
who  is  not  in  his  right  mind  from  doing  wicked 
things  which  he  would  afterwards  regret.  The 
questions  that  remain  are  these:  What  things 
are  wicked  ;  and  who  is  to  be  the  judge  ;  when 
is  a  man  not  in  his  right  mind  ;  and  who  is  to  be 
the  judge  ;  how,  or  with  how  much  force,  are  we 
to  save  him  ;  and  who  is  to  be  the  judge  ;  and 
when,  and  under  what  circumstances,  is  it  our  busi- 
ness to  step  in;  and  again  who  is  to  be  the  judge? 
These  are  questions  that  the  wisest  man  who  ever 
lived  could  not  answer  offhand,  nor  beforehand;  and 
the  man  who  thinks  he  can  answer  them,  and  has 


98  The  New  Word 

answered  them,  by  shouting  the  word  Humanity,  Is 
more  out  of  his  mind,  and  more  In  need  of  restraint, 
than  any  soldier  or  taxgatherer  or  tsar. 

The  moment  a  question  becomes  one  of  degree  It 
is  time  for  enthusiasm  to  call  In  wisdom.  The  mis- 
take of  my  altruistic  friend  was  In  leaving  wisdom 
out  of  his  explanation.  And  It  so  happens  that 
wisdom  has  the  same  Imaginary  Aryan  root  as 
Idealism. 

Humanity  is  a  false  word  because,  as  we  have 
seen.  It  means  that  there  are,  or  ought  to  be,  no 
differences  between  men.  It  means,  for  Instance,  that 
there  is  no  difference  between  white  men  and  black, 
and  that  if,  in  any  place  where  they  are  living  side  by 
side,  there  happen  to  be  more  blacks  than  whites,  the 
blacks  ought  to  rule  the  whites.  That  falsehood  Is 
enshrined  in  the  political  creed  of  North  America. 
It  has  cost  the  Americans  a  hundred  thousand  lives. 
It  is  still  costing  them  crimes  as  frightful  as  the  word 
Catholic  cost  Europe.  And  the  same  men  who 
say  that  black  men  ought  to  rule  over  white  men 
in  the  Carollnas  will  not  let  a  yellow  child  sit  in  the 
same  schoolroom  with  a  white  child  in  San  Fran- 
cisco. 

IV 

Humanity  is  least  of  all  an  altruistic  word.  The 
Religion  of  Humanity  pretends  to  be  the  worship  of 
men  and  women  by  men  and  women.    And  it  is  not 


Altruism:  The  Face  in  the  Looking-Glass     99 

even  that.  Because  the  idolaters  have  an  ideal  man 
or  woman  whom  they  really  worship.  That  idol  is 
their  own  reflection  in  the  looking-glass,  and  hence 
their  Service  of  Humanity  is  apt  to  mean  an  effort 
to  make  Man  in  their  own  image. 

So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  learn  by  watching 
what  they  do,  instead  of  listening  to  what  they  say, 
their  idol  is  very  much  like  a  Unitarian  minister  ; 
a  man  of  some  information,  and  of  some  taste  in 
the  arts  ;  firmly  respectful  of  the  inherited  tabus 
of  Europe,  with  leanings  toward  teetotalism  and 
vegetarianism  ;  abounding  in  Mediterranean  words 
of  an  immaterial  tendency  ;  with  not  much  sense  of 
humour,  and  still  less  of  his  own  infirmities  ;  and 
with  rather  a  strong  sense  of  the  infirmities  of  pthers, 
and  a  strong  disposition  to  make  them  better  from 
his  point  of  view,  and  worse  from  their  point  of 
view. 

Now  this  may  be  the  Coming  Man.  This  idol 
may  be  destined  to  grow  up  and  overshadow  the 
world.  I  do  not  say  that  it  is  a  bad  idol.  Only  do 
not  let  us  call  it  Humanity.  If  the  whole  earth  is  to 
be  ruled  smooth  in  its  name  ;  if  all  the  men  and 
women  it  now  holds,  from  the  five  hundred 
millions  of  Chinese  down  to  the  dwarfs  who  haunt 
beyond  the  Mountains  of  the  Moon,  are  to  be 
ground  beneath  the  car  of  this  new  Juggernath,  let 
us  know  what  we  are  doing  ;  and  do  not  let  us  use 
the  word  Humanity. 

The  trees  of  the  forest  are  not  all  alike,  neitHcf 


loo  The  New  Word 

are  the  stars  In  heaven.  As  there  Is  one  beauty  of 
the  violet,  and  another  beauty  of  the  rose,  so  there 
Is  one  manhood  of  the  North,  and  another  man- 
hood of  the  South,  one  manhood  of  the  tsar  and 
another  manhood  of  the  peasant,  one  manhood  of  the 
moneymaker  and  another  manhood  of  the  artist. 
The  most  Inhuman,  because  the  most  false,  words 
ever  spoken  about  man  are  the  words  "  normal 
man.  "     For  man  himself  Is  an  abnormal  beast. 

Is  It  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  that  man  should 
be  his  own  God  ?  That  Is  the  question  which  has 
to  be  answered  yes  or  no. 

The  Religion  of  Humanity  is  not  the  worship  of 
the  best  man,  nor  of  the  best  In  man.  It  is  the 
worship  of  the  middling  man.  It  is  the  consecra- 
tion of  that  instinct  which  causes  men  to  kill  to 
their  own  loss  the  best  man,  to  starve  the  poet  and  to 
stone  the  prophet,  to  scourge  and  crucify  the  Christ. 

How  can  such  worship  be  idealistic  ?  It  is  the 
least  Idealistic  of  any.  It  Is  the  denial  of  worship, 
the  denial  of  verihood,  and  the  denial  of  hope. 


SEVENTH  HEAD 


THE  SHAPE 

The  Counter-Spell. — i.  A  Work  of  a  Materialist 
Tendency. — 2.  Athanasian  Language. — ^3.  Inventory  of 
the  Universe., — 4.     An  Idealistic  Word. 

T  WENT  on  asking  every  one  I  met  his  meaning 
-*•  for  the  word  Idealist,  till  in  the  end  I  came  to  a 
wise  man  who  answered, — "  I  don't  know.  I  should 
have  thought  that  ideal  was  the  opposite  to  mate- 
rial." 

Every  one  else  had  tried  to  explain  idealism  by 
itself.  This  was  the  first  attempt  to  explain  it  by 
something  else.  The  Babu  terms,  of  course,  are 
Absolute  and  Relative,  meaning,  as  far  as  I  can 
make  out.  Untied  and  Beside. 

As  soon  as  I  had  this  answer  I  felt  sure  it  was  a 
clew  that  would  lead  me  out  of  the  labyrinth.  The 
word  Beside  I  had  long  since  found  to  be  an  amulet 
of  strange  power  against  the  sorcerers,  including 
those  diviners  who  now  write  themselves  divines. 
When  I  was  rather  young — indeed,  before  I  had 
learned  to  translate  these  Mediterranean  words — I 
was  once  taken  by  a  Mediterranean-minded  friend 
to  be  enchanted  by  a  learned  and  affable  diviner  of 
the  Society  of  Jesus.  The  magician  began,  using 
the  wisdom  of  the  serpent,  by  drawing  from  me  that 

lOI 

imm 

UKIVERSiTY  OF  m  !FOf;WiA 


I02  The  New  Word 

I  had  been  brought  up  in  the  communion  called  the 
Plymouth  Brethren,  whose  peculiar  tenets  he  seemed 
disposed  to  handle  in  a  spirit  of  urbane  mockery. 
On  my  avowing  that  I  had  not  come  to  defend  those 
tenets,  nor  any  others,  but  rather  to  learn  from 
him,  we  insensibly  changed  groimd,  and,  passing 
from  depth  to  depth,  we  rested  on  the  discovery  that 
for  my  courteous  entertainer  truth  was  Absolute, 
while  for  me  it  was  Relative.  There  being  no 
oubliette  available,  I  was  then  suffered  to  depart 
unhurt. 

It  was  like  that  story  in  the  Thousand  Nights  and 
a  Night,  the  most  wonderful  story  of  the  world,  in 
which  a  princess  skilled  in  the  magical  art  enters 
into  mortal  combat  with  a  djinn.  The  djinn  changes 
by  turns  into  a  wolf,  a  fish  and  a  pomegranate  seed  ; 
and  the  princess  pursues  him  as  a  dog,  a  serpent 
and  a  cock  ;  till  at  the  last  the  djinn  is  driven  to 
assume  his  fiery  shape,  and  the  two  antagonists  ap- 
pear fighting  in  the  air  with  flames. 

The  wise  man's  answer  was  the  one  towards  which 
I  had  been  groping  my  way  all  along,  the  answer 
towards  which  all  the  other  answers  pointed  more 
or  less  distinctly.  The  great  word  of  Andronicus 
Rhodius  itself  might  be  translated  Anti-Material. 
A  work  of  an  idealist  tendency,  I  could  doubt  no 
longer,  must  be  one  that  looked  Materialism  in  the 
face. 

What  then  was  Materialism? 


Materialism:  The  Shape  103 


I 


It  was  with  a  curious  feeling  of  relief  that  I 
exchanged  the  old  question  for  the  new.  I  felt  that 
I  should  now  be  on  firm  ground.  I  was  about  to 
pass  out  of  the  enchanted  wood  of  words  into  the 
open  field  of  things.  I  had  been  vexed  for  some 
time  by  a  gathering  suspicion  that  Materialism  must 
be  common  sense  and  Idealism  must  be  nonsense  ; 
that  one  must  be  true,  and  the  other  false.  I  even 
began  to  fear  that  the  well-meaning  folk  who  call 
themselves  Idealists  were  at  heart  Materialists,  mak- 
ing-believe to  believe  in  Idealism,  because  they 
wished  it  were  true.  The  Materialists  I  envied  as 
men  who  walked  by  sight  and  not  by  faith,  and  had 
no  need  of  make-belief. 

But,  now,  where  was  this  common  sense  teaching 
to  be  found  ?  Where  was  it  set  out  in  sensible 
words,  and  not  in  Andronican  ciphers  ? 

I  sought  out  a  cunning  bookseller,  and  put  the 
question. 

"  I  want  a  little  book  of  a  Materialist  tendency." 

The  bookseller  looked  ever  so  slightly  startled. 

"  Do  you  mean  a  book  attacking  religion  ? "  he 
asked  mc. 

I  was  rather  taken  aback. 

"  No,  no  ;  I  don't  want  a  controversial  book.  I 
want  a  book  that  will  give  me  In  a  short  and  simple 
fashion  the  Materialist  view  of  life.     The  sort  of 


I04  The  New  Word 

book  that  could  be  put  into  the  hands  of  a  school- 
boy." 

"  I  am  afraid  I  don't  know  of  any  such  book," 
said  the  bookseller. 

"  What,"  I  said,  "is  there  no  book  which  tells  a 
child  something  about  the  world  In  which  he  finds 
himself  ?  When  I  was  a  child  I  read  a  book  that 
told  me — '  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens 
and  the  earth.'  Now  I  am  told  that  is  only  poetry  ; 
and  I  want  to  know  the  facts." 

The  bookseller  thought  for  a  moment,  and  then 
brightened  up. 

"  I  think  I  have  the  very  book  you  require, — The 
Story  of  Creation." 

This  was  a  good  hearing.  The  name  of  the  book 
assured  me  that  it  had  been  written  to  meet  the  need 
I  felt.     I  asked  for  a  copy. 

"  I  ought  to  tell  you  that  we  consider  it  a  little 
advanced,"  the  bookseller  observed  cautiously,  as  he 
handed  me  the  book. 

"By  'advanced,'  you  mean ?" 

"A   little   outspoken." 

"  Outspoken  !  But  that  Is  just  what  I  am  looking 
for, — struggling  for.  My  trouble  Is  that  I  cannot 
find  any  book  that  Is  outspoken  enough.  You  speak 
as  If  that  were  some  fault  In  a  book  ! " 

"  Well,  of  course,  we  have  to  deal  with  all  classes  ; 
and  we  find  that  some  people  object  to  a  book  If  It 
speaks  too  plainly.  They  are  a  little  afraid  of 
Materialism,  we  find." 


Materialism:  The  Shape  lo^ 

"  By  afraid,  do  you  mean  they  are  afraid  that  it 
is  true,  or  afraid  that  it  is  false  ?  " 

The  bookseller  hesitated. 

"Well,  I  suppose — of  course,  I  can't  say — but  I 
should  think  they  were  afraid  that  it  might  unsettle 
their  views." 

"True    views,  do  you  mean  ;  or  false  views  ?" 

The  bookseller  shook  his  head. 

"  I  don't  ask  them  that.  Our  business  is  to  sell 
people  what  books  we  think  they  will  like,  without 
inquiring  about  their  views." 

"  But  how  can  you  tell  what  books  they  will  like, 
unless  you  know  their  views  ?  " 

The  bookseller  smiled. 

"  In  our  business  we  can  generally  tell  pretty  soon 
what  sort  of  books  people  will  like." 

I  saw  that  I  was  talking  with  an  able  man.  I 
could  not  refrain  from  asking  him  the  riddle. 

"  What  sort  of  book,  should  you  say,  was  a  work 
of  an  idealist  tendency  ?  " 

My  bookseller  frowned  thoughtfully.  Then  he 
slowly  shook  his  head. 

"I  could  hardly  tell  you  that,  sir.  We  don't  stock 
many  books  of  that  kind.  There  is  no  demand 
for  them.  People  don't  much  care  about  idealism 
in  these  days.  They  like  something  of  a  practical 
tendency." 

And  so  I  had  got  yet  another  meaning  for  the 
Testator's  word. 


io6  The  New  Word 


11 


Rightly  to  tell  the  parable  of  science,  to  put  the 
story  of  the  creation  into  better  words  than  those 
which  have  satisfied  a  hundred  generations,  were 
surely  as  great  a  task  as  man  could  set  himself.  This 
were  indeed  a  work  of  an  idealist  tendency.  In 
what  high  mood,  after  what  prayers  and  strivings, 
with  what  fear  and  joy,  dare  any  man  sit  down  to 
write  the  first  chapter  of  the  new  Book  of  Life  ? 

It  was  with  thoughts  like  these,  and  with,  I  hope, 
an  open  mind,  that  I  began  to  read  the  Story  of 
Creation. 

The  learned  and  distinguished  author  writes  as  a 
priest  of  what  he  calls  the  Theory  of  Evolution. 
His  motive  is  wholly  praiseworthy,  for  he  says  in 
his  preface  that — "complete  expositions  of  the 
theory  are  only  to  be  found  in  bulky  volumes  with 
which  few  readers  have  the  time  and  courage  to 
grapple."  No  state  of  things  could  be  graver  and 
more  regrettable.  For  in  so  far  as  the  theory  is 
a  true  interpretation  of  life  it  must  behove  every 
living  man  to  do  his  best  to  master  it. 

This,  then,  is  a  book  for  the  beginner  ;  and  if  I 
am  rightly  informed  it  has  been,  and  is  still  being, 
widely  read  as  such.  To  the  beginner  the  author 
declares  his  purpose  is  to  give  "  a  clear  idea  of  the 
mechanism  of  the  universe." — It  disappointed  me  to 
find  already  that  Materialism    could    not    get    on 


Materialism:  The  Shape  107 

witHout  the  word  idea,  with  which  few  beginners 
have  the  time  and  courage  to  grapple.  Nor  was  it 
less  discouraging  to  learn  that,  even  for  the  Mate- 
rialist, there  are  several  "  abiding  mysteries  in  the 
universe,"  such  as  the  nebula,  the  crystal,  and  the 
cell.  Much  more  disconcerting  was  it  to  be  told 
that  of  the  beginnings,  and  even  "  of  the  things 
themselves" — (those  objects  of  the  external 
world  !) — "nothing  can  be  known."  I  might  have 
been  reading  the  Athanasian  Creed. 

There  were  further  disappointments  of  the  same 
kind  in  store  for  me.  Almost  in  his  next  sentence  I 
found  the  writer  calling  the  things  themselves  "  ma- 
terial phenomena."  Of  thought  and  emotion,  he 
added,  no  material  qualities  could  be  predicated. 
And  lastly  my  teacher  with  a  single  sentence  laid  the 
whole  material  world  round  me  in  niin  : — "  We  can- 
not make  the  passage  from  chemistry  to  conscious- 
ness." 

When  I  had  read  thus  far  I  seriously  feared  that 
I  had  been  imposed  upon,  and  that  the  Story  of 
Creation  was  a  satire  on  Materialism,  written  by 
one  who  was  secretly  a  disciple  of  Andronikos  of 
Rhodes. 

I  had  despaired  of  Materialism  too  soon,  however. 
All  this  was  but  the  introductory  chapter,  a  feature 
dispensed  with  In  the  work  which  this  one  Is  de- 
signed to  supersede.  On  the  next  page  the  Story 
of  Creation  began  In  earnest,  with  the  Impressive 
heading, — 


lo8  The  New  Word 

"The  Universe  :  Its  Contents/' 

There  seems  to  be  some  contradiction  between  the 
author's  word  Universe,  and  his  other  word  Evolu- 
tion. Universe  is  the  Babu  way  of  writing  One- 
ward,  whereas  there  is  authority  for  saying  that 
Evolution  is  the  transformation  of  an  indefinite  homo- 
geneity into  a  definite  heterogeneity,  or,  as  it  may  be 
put  in  English,  one  turning  into  many,  rather  than 
many  into  one.  It  is  dangerous  to  use  that  other 
learned  name  Kosmos,  which  is  to  say.  Order, 
because  whether  the  world  is  orderly  is  still  an  open 
question.  One  eminent  divine  found  it  so  orderly 
that  it  showed  itself  to  be  the  handiwork  of  God; 
another  found  it  so  disorderly  that  it  showed 
itself  to  be  in  a  state  of  alienation  from  God. 
The  latter  opinion  seems  to  be  the  orthodox  one 
among  the  Materialists  of  all  denominations.  On 
this  head  the  words  of  Huxley  are  as  the  words 
of  Newman.  There  is  a  consensus  of  opinion  that 
the  universe  is  ill-behaved.  They  only  differ  as  to 
what  the  well-behaved  man  had  better  do  in  the  cir- 
cumstances. The  cardinal  advises  him  to  go  to  sleep 
and  dream  of  a  universe  more  to  his  liking.  The 
professor  advises  him  to  stand  no  nonsense  from  the 
universe,  but  to  correct  it.  "  Pull  me  down  these 
riotous  woodlands,"  he  seems  to  say,  "  and  build 
me  a  rectangular  boulevard  patrolled  by  the  police  ; 
destroy  me  this  shameless  dell  with  all  its  moss  and 
wild-flowers,  and  give  me  in  its  place  a  square 
garden  adorned  with  iron  rails  and  carpet  bedding. 


Materialism:  The  Shape  109 

and  a  notice   forbidding  children  to  run  over  the 
grass." 

World  is  the  old  English  name,  but  it  Is  the  name 
for  an  old  universe,  when  our  earth  stood  fast  In  the 
middle,  and  all  the  stars  went  round  It.  I  shall  feel 
safer  If  I  write  All-Thing  or  Everything. 


Ill 


"The  Universe  Is  made  up  of  Matter  and 
Power. " 

This  sentence  assured  me  that  the  Story  of  Cre- 
ation was  the  work  of  a  genuine  Materialist. 

There  is  a  habit  of  mind  common  to  all  Material- 
ists, by  whatever  name  they  may  describe  them- 
selves. They  may  choose  to  be  called  Positivists  or 
Agnostics,  Scientists  or  Believers,  Catholics  or 
Secularists,  but  however  much  they  may  differ  in 
details,  their  minds  all  work  along  certain  lines  or 
rules  of  thought  like  these: 

1.  It  Is  easier  for  there  to  be  shape  without 
strength,  than  strength  without  shape. 

2.  It  is  easier  for  things  not  to  be,  than  for  them 
to  be. 

3.  It  is  easier  for  things  to  keep  still  than  for 
them  to  move. 

4.  It  is  easier  to  be  dead  than  living. 

It  is  in  obedience  to  this  Instinct  that  the  author 


no  The  New  Word 

of  the  Story  of  Creation  has  made  Matter  the  first 
item  in  his  inventory  of  the  All-Thing,  and  Power 
the  second.  An  older  story  has  it — "  In  the  begin- 
ning God." 

Matter,  the  author  deems  to  be  a  word  needing 
explanation;  and  he  explains  it  as  a  term  for 
"  substances  that  occupy  space  and  affect  the 
senses." 

It  is  hard  that  a  Materialist  writer  should  be  no 
more  able  than  Doctor  Latham  to  free  himself  from 
the  meshes  of  Mediterranean  speech.  Substance, 
I  have  reason  to  believe,  is  a  high  and  mysterious 
word  which  plays  a  great  part  in  the  Andronican 
science.  I  confess  I  understand  it  less  well  than 
Matter;  and  in  so  far  as  I  do  understand  it  its  mean- 
ing is  opposed  somehow  to  that  of  the  author's  other 
Babu  word,  phenomena.  Nay,  is  it  not  written  in  a 
treatise  on  Logic  by  no  less  a  person  than  Doctor 
Latham  himself, — "  It  is,  perhaps,  unnecessary  to 
say  that  substance,  as  used  by  logicians,  has  by  no 
means  the  sense  which  so  often  attaches  to  it  in 
ordinary  conversation,  viz.,  that  of  Matter  or 
Body." 

My  present  business  with  the  Story  of  Creation  is 
not  to  find  fault  with  its  bad  language,  but,  if  I  can, 
to  pierce  through  the  words  to  what  the  writer  is 
really  trying  to  say.  But  in  a  work  on  Materialism 
the  word  Matter  is  surely  the  one  on  which  every- 
things  turns,  and  if  so  it  is  worth  while  to  ask  what 
it  stands  for. 


Materialism:  Ike  :snape  iii 


TV 


We  know  by  this  time  what  answer  to  expect  from 
lexicography.  The  words — ^^"  What  is  the  mat- 
ter ?  "  are  ahnost  the  first  words  an  English  child 
hears  from  its  nurse.  Doctor  Latham  sleepily 
murmurs  that  she  is  talking  French  or  Latin  ;  she 
is  trying  to  say  matiere,  or  materia.  (Imagine  a 
French  nurse  asking  "  Qii*est-ce  que  c'est  que  la 
matiere  ?")  A  mat  is  one  of  the  commonest  objects 
in  every  English  cottage,  as  it  was  in  every  cave- 
dweller's  cave.  Doctor  Latham  turns  on  his  side, 
and  mutters, — "Roman — Malta."  The  latest 
and  best  guesser  hazards — "  Carthaginian-M^pp«." 
That  a  word  spelt  with  two  is  should  come  from 
a  word  spelt  with  one,  and  a  word  spelt  with  one  t 
from  a  word  spelt  with  two  ;  that  four  syllables 
should  shrink  to  two,  and  two  to  one,  makes  no 
matter  to  exact  philology.  Still  less  does  it  matter 
that  a  French  noun  should  have  changed  into  an 
English  verb  ;  that  a  provincial  Englishman  ii> 
Dickens'  pages  should  spell  that  verb  moither  or 
moidher,  and  use  it  in  the  nurse's  sense  of  to  worry, 
or  to  get  into  a  knot  that  has  to  be  untied  ;  still 
less  that  every  Irishman  should  say  matther,  or  that 
the  Welsh  name  for  plaited  work  should  be  mat,  and 
for  a  spread  of  rushes  on  the  floor  matJir.  But  it 
so  happens  that  my  own  nurse  was  a  provincial 
Englishwoman,  with  the  Welsh  name  of  Griffiths, 


112  The  New  Word 

and  was  less  skilled  in  French  and  Latin  and  in  Punic 
than  Doctor  Latham  and  Professor  Skeat  suppose  ; 
and  she  was  my  first  authority  on  the  English 
language,  and  one  much  more  to  be  feared  than 
they. 

Now,  that  the  learned  author  of  the  Story  of  Crea- 
tion meant  to  write  dog-latin,  and  hoped  that  he  was 
writing  dog-latin,  is  very  likely  indeed.  But  he  has 
been  inspired  against  his  will  to  use  an  English  word, 
and  I  shall  pin  it  to  the  English  meaning.  For  the 
difference  between  materia  and  matter  is  almost  the 
difference  between  materialism  and  idealism. 

The  old  mother-tongue  of  the  White  race,  into 
which  the  first  bishop  of  the  Goths,  labouring  beside 
the  Danube,  translated  the  mightiest  of  Mediter- 
ranean books,  has  left  two  precious  relics  of  itself. 
One  is  a  manuscript  written  in  silver  letters,  and 
guarded  in  the  university  of  Upsal  ;  the  other  is  a 
living  dialect  not  yet  uprooted  from  two  villages  in 
the  isle  of  Gothland.  And  deeming  it  part  of  this 
inquiry  to  learn  somewhat  of  the  speech  of  my 
forefathers,  I  made  my  way,  not  to  the  university  of 
Upsal,  but  to  the  isle  of  Gothland.  There  I  was 
'fortunate,  and  Sweden  and  the  white  race  are 
fortunate,  enough  to  find  a  teacher  in  Doctor  Klint- 
berg,  who  has  given  his  life  to  gather,  as  no  dialect 
has  ever  yet  been  gathered,  these  precious  wild  flowers 
of  speech  before  the  schoolmaster  has  had  time  to 
root  them  up.  And  among  the  treasures  in  his  col- 
lection, which  English  philologists  will  one  day  prize 


Materialism:  The  Shape  113 

above  many  monkish  manuscripts,  I  came  upon  this 
rhyme  sung  by  the  children  in  one  of  their  plays  : — 

"  Abburn   laikar   sat   noti   gar   sundar; 
Dar  n  far  hul,  sa  kraupa  n  under." 

Or  as  it  might  be  sung  in  many  English  villages : — 

Perch  plays   so  'at  net  goes  asunder; 
There  un  finds  hole,  so  creeps  un  under. 

The  word  noti  gives  us  the  clew  to  mat  and  matter. 
On  the  one  hand  it  merges  into  knot,  either  through 
a  form  like  ge-not,  or  by  the  likeness  between  a  knot 
and  a  knob — the  kn  or  en  is  common  to  the  Gothic 
and  Celtic  languages  ;  on  the  other  hand  it  merges 
into  the  French  natte,  and  so  into  net  and  mat.  For 
a  mat,  as  it  seems  needful  to  point  out  to  philol- 
ogists, is  a  net  in  which  the  holes  are  smaller,  and 
the  knots  closer  together. 

Now  netting  or  matting  or  knotting  is  one  of  the 
earliest  handicrafts  of  man  ;  the  Congo  dwarfs  mat 
the  undergrowth  of  the  forest  to  entrap  the  elephant. 
It  is  much  older  than  man  ;  the  spider  weaves  its 
net,  and  the  bird  its  nest.  It  is  still  older  than  they 
are  ;  when  we  speak  of  matted  hair  and  matted 
weeds,  we  are  thinking  of  a  rough  natural  entangle- 
ment, of  the  network  of  nature  rather  than  of  man. 
We  are  not  thinking  of  the  Carthaginians,  nor  even 
of  the  Romans,  nor  of  the  Normans  ;  and  though 
the  Norman  lady  may  have    trimmed    the    Saxon 


114  The  New  Word 

nurse's  tongue,  she  has  not  trimmed  the  Saxon  sense. 
No  one  but  a  schoolmaster  writing  a  scholastic 
treatise  in  technical  terms  would  dream  of  using 
the  word  matter  in  the  sense  of  substance.  For 
everybody  else,  and  for  the  schoolmaster  himself 
in  his  waking  hours,  it  means  very  much  what  mat 
means,  a  knot  or  knotwork,  a  tangle  or  a  net.  And 
so,  when  the  nurse  asks, — "  What  is  the  matter  ?  " 
she  is  not  talking  dog-latin,  and  she  does  not  mean, 
what  Is  the  material  substance  ;  but  she  is  talking 
English,  and  she  means,  what  is  the  trouble  ;  what 
has  gone  wrong  ? 

Perhaps  it  is  because  the  first  use  of  a  net  is  to 
stop  the  elephant,  or  the  perch,  from  going  further, 
perhaps  it  is  because  of  its  likeness  with  mud,  that 
the  word,  or  a  word  like  It,  has  come  to  mean,  in 
Latin  if  not  In  English,  that  which  "  occupies  space 
and  affects  the  senses."  And  yet,  iremarkably 
enough,  one  of  the  most  eminent  workers  In  physical 
science,  Lord  Kelvin,  has  suggested  that  what  we  call 
Matter  began  with  tangled  waves  in  the  ether  ;  so 
that  science  Is  learning  to  give  the  nurse's  meaning  to 
the  nurse's  word. 

The  word  substance,  of  course,  has  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  matter.  It  means  inside,  and 
the  folk  word  for  it,  the  word  which  this  writer  him- 
self uses  elsewhere,  is  stuff,  or  stuffing.  That  Is 
the  word  stop  In  Its  materialistic  form, — the  dentist 
stops  a  tooth,  and  the  French  write  estotiper,  as  well 
as  etouffer.     But  matter  is  an  ontologist's    word  ; 


Materialism:  The  Shape  115 

the  knot  is  verily  a  mystery  ;  here  is  a  word  of  an 
idealist  tendency  ; — no  wonder  that  the  Story  of 
Creation  tried  to  explain  it  away. 

Yet  all  this  time  the  writer  is  deceiving  himself 
and  us.  The  word  really  inside  his  mind  is  neither 
knot  nor  stop,  but  Shape. — In  my  Dutch  word-book 
I  have  found  this  curious  entry  :  ^^  Scheppitig- 
sgescheidenis,  history  of  the  creation." 


EIGHTH    HEAD 


THE   KNOT 

The  Unknowable. — i.  Ultimate  Nature  of  Matter. — • 
2.  Logical  Chemistry. — 3.  The  Dustbin  of  Science. — 
4.     Story  of  the  Crumb. 

'nr^HE  All-Thing  being  made  up  of  strength  and 
-"■  stuffing,  we  are  naturally  curious  to  learn  what 
the  stuffing  is  made  up  of. 

Unhappily  the  spirit  of  Athanasius  now  enters 
again  into  the  author  of  the  Story  of  Shaping,  with- 
out driving  out  that  of  Andronikos  of  Rhodes. 

"  The  ultimate  nature  of  Matter  remains  unknown 
and  unknowable." 

I 

Unknowable  has  never  struck  me  as  a  useful 
word,  and  it  is  generally  an  unlucky  one.  As  soon 
as  any  enchanter  has  declared  to  us  that  the.  path 
to  the  sun  across  the  sky  is  unknowable,  some  learner 
Is  sure  to  come  forward  and  tell  us  all  about  it.  As 
soon  as  another  has  affirmed  that  the  number  of 
hairs  on  a  man's  head  is  unknowable,  the  exact 
figures  are  sure  to  be  forthcoming  from  a  statisti- 
cian. (Since  these  words  were  first  written  the  Nobel 
Prize  for  Physics  has  been  awarded  for  the  discovery 
of  the  ultimate  nature  of  Matter.)     It  is  difficult 

116 


Physics:  The  Knot  117 

to  see  what  any  one  thinks  he  has  to  gain  by  holding 
up  a  warning  hand  to  posterity  in  this  fashion,  with 
a — Thus  far  shalt  thou  come,  and  no  farther  ! 

And  consider  what  it  is  that  remains  unknow- 
able. The  ultimate  nature  of  Matter.  "Ultimate 
nature  "  sounds  far  too  much  like  ta  meta  ta  phusika. 
Why  does  the  writer  take  it  for  granted  that  Matter 
has  an  ultimate  nature  ?  He  goes  on  to  say, — "  We 
can  only  infer  what  it  is,  by  learning  what  it  does." 
Clearly  he  sees  some  difference  between  being  and 
doing, — he  knows  but  will  not  tell.  He  seems  to 
say  in  other  words, — I  see  something  called  Matter 
mov^ing  about,  and  hence  I  infer  that  there  is  another 
something  called  its  Ultimate  Nature,  keeping  still  ; 
which  other  something  is  unknowable. — Surely  that 
is  like  building  a  bridge  you  never  intend  to  cross. 

Yet  the  author  is  better  than  his  word,  for  he 
goes  on  to  tell  us  somewhat,  If  not  of  the  ultimate, 
at  least  of  the  penultimate,  nature  of  Matter. 

"  The  actions  of  bodies,  whatever  their  states,  arc 
explicable  only  on  the  assumption  that  the  bodies 
are  made  up  of  Infinitely  small  particles  which.  In 
their  combined  state,  as  mechanical  units,  are  called 
molecules,  and  In  their  free  state,  as  chemical  units, 
are  called  atoms." 

"Infinitely"  Is  a  big  word.  When  we  have 
reached  Infinity  the  ultimate  cannot  be  much 
farther  on.  The  author,  unhappily,  was  using  it 
only  as  a  sort  of  swear  word,  meaning  very  small, 
for  presently  he  calculates  the  size  of  these  Infinitely 


ii8  The  New  Word 

small  particles.  As  many  of  them  (he  says)  would 
go  into  a  drop  of  water  as  cricket-balls  into  an 
Earth. — I  have  forgotten  how  many  angels  could 
dance  upon  a  needle's  point,  according  to  the  highest 
theological  authority. 

But  at  this  point  the  Story  of  Creation  becomes 
so  knotty,  and  the  writer  loses  his  way  so  hope- 
lessly among  the  terms  element,  molecule  and  atom, 
that  I  have  to  put  in  my  own  homely  words  what 
I  have  gathered  to  be  the  teaching  of  Materialism 
on  this  head.  Nor  ought  the  writer  to  be  blamed 
for  his  failure,  since  he  has  evidently  started  with 
the  belief  that  his  authorities  know  what  they  are 
saying,  whereas  I  have  started  with  the  belief  that 
they  most  probably  do  not. 

II 

We  need  a  Babu  glossary: — 

Element  :  Forethought,  beginning. 
Atom  :  Uncut,  uncutable.   ' 
Molecule  :  Little  heap. 

By  the  word  element  I  understand  modern  chem- 
ists to  mean  those  webworks  in  the  All-Thing,  such 
as  hydrogen  and  gold,  which  they  have  not  been 
able  to  unweave,  as  they  unweave  water  into  oxygen 
and  hydrogen.  Of  the  elements,  which  he  some- 
times carelessly  calls  atoms,  the  author  of  the  Story 
of  Creation  says  in  his  sternest  Athanasian  vein, — ' 


Physics:  The  Knot  119 

"Since  the  present  universe  had  its  beginning  the 
elements  have  undergone  no  change."  In  some  past 
universe,  perhaps,  they  were  less  stubborn.  In  the 
meanwhile,  of  course,  they  are  outside  the  Theory 
of  Evolution,  although  my  teacher  omits  to  note 
the  fact. 

Of  the  atom,  its  modern  discoverer,  Dalton, 
proudly  declared, — "No  man  can  split  an  atom"; 
or,  in  other  words,  no  man  can  split  the  unsplitable. 
The  eminent  Huxley  no  less  rashly  boasted, — "  The 
atom  is  truly  an  immortal  being."  My  author,  with 
a  diffidence  as  welcome  as  it  is  unexpected,  contents 
himself  in  saying  that  the  atom_s  have  not  yet  been 
split.     And  even  that  is  not  true. 

I  find  there  are  at  least  three  atoms  known  to 
science,  or  at  least  to  Scientology,  the  arithmetical 
atom,  the  physical  one,  and  the  logical  one.  Of 
these  the  logical  one  has  been  kept  intact  by  un- 
heard of  efforts  ;  the  other  two  have  been  split,  and 
are  being  split  every  day. 

The  first,  or  chemical  atom,  is  no  more  than  an 
arithmetical  term,  In  short  it  is  an  item.  The 
chemist  has  found  that  when  his  elements  unite  with 
each  other  they  do  so  always  in  fixed  proportions, 
and  it  is  the  proportion  which  he  is  thinking  of 
when  he  uses  the  word  atom.  Thus  when  he  wants 
to  say  that  in  every  gallon  of  water,  or  steam,  there 
are  two  pints  of  hydrogen  for  one  pint  of  oxygen, 
he  puts  It  that  the  "atom  "  of  hydrogen  is  H2.  In 
hydrochloric  acid  this  atom  splits,  and  we  get  Hj 


'120  The  New  Word 

or  more  simply  H.  It  is  this  atom  which  is  some- 
times confused  with  element  in  the  Story  of  Creation 
and  elsewhere.  It  appears  to  have  no  more  to  do 
with  the  nature  of  Matter  than  the  figure  o  has. 

The  atom  which  has  for  so  long  engaged  the  atten- 
tion of  physicists,  or  physical  chemists,  is  of  course 
the  old  atom  of  Democritus,  and  is  merely  a  small 
crumb  of  Matter,  measuring,  according  to  the  latest 
and  best  of  my  authorities,  a  thousand  millionth 
of  an  inch  across.  The  Story  of  Creation  terms  it 
an  assumption,  or,  shall  we  say,  an  image  formed 
in  the  mind.  Of  such  crumbs,  real  or  imaginary. 
Matter  is  at  present  believed  to  be  made  up.  When 
the  experiment  famous  for  giving  us  the  Rontgen 
rays  is  made,  still  smaller  crumblets,  called  cor- 
puscles, are  believed  to  be  rent  away  from  the  main 
crumb,  and  thus  the  physical  atom  is  split. 

The  molecule  may  be  regarded  as  a  married 
crumb,  and  sometimes  a  polygam.ous  one.  Thus  in 
the  case  of  water  the  oxygen  crumb  was  long  believed 
to  take  to  itself  two  hydrogen  crumbs,  and  the  little 
heap  thus  formed  was  not  three  crumbs,  but  one 
crum.b.  Such  a  molecule  may  be  likened  to  a  bronze 
coin  made  by  melting  down  together  two  copper 
coins  and  one  tin  coin.  No  one,  of  course,  has  ever 
seen  or  handled  any  such  crumb.  The  chemist 
cannot  pick  his  little  heaps  out  of  the  real  heap, 
but  he  can  work  a  sort  of  earthquake  by  which  the 
whole  heap  of  bronze  coins  is  rent  into  two  heaps, 
one  of  tin  coins,  and  one  of  copper  coins.     Every 


Physics:  The  Knot  121 

coin  Is  to-day  called  a  molecule,  but  only  in  a  state 
of  celibacy  is  it  also  called  an  atom. 

All  that  is  plain  sailing,  when  it  is  explained.  The 
difficulty  is  with  the  logical  atom  which  is,  as  one 
of  my  authorities  very  sagely  observes,  "  by  defini- 
tion, indivisible."  Accordingly,  as  soon  as  one 
of  the  real  atoms  does  divide,  the  definition  is  re- 
defined to  meet  the  altered  circumstances.  As 
thus : — 

Finding  that  one  pint  of  a  gas  always  unites  with 
one  or  more  full  pints  of  another  gas,  and  never 
with  any  odd  fraction  of  a  pint,  the  chemists  have 
concluded  that  every  pint  of  gas  contains  the  same 
number  of  crumbs.  But  now  when  the  two  pints 
of  hydrogen  unite  with  the  one  pint  of  oxygen,  they 
do  not  make  three  pints  of  steam,  but  only  two  pints. 
Therefore  the  chemists  choose  to  say  that  the  num_- 
ber  of  steam  crumbs  Is  the  sam.e  with  that  of  the 
original  hydrogen  crumbs,  and  double  that  of  the 
original  oxygen  crumbs.  What,  then,  has  hap- 
pened  ?  Each  of  the  oxygen  crumbs  must  have  split 
in  two,  one  half  joining  each  hydrogen  crumb.  But 
the  atom  Is  "by  definition,  indivisible."  How  then 
can  it  split  ?  The  answer  Is  that  the  oxygen  crumb 
must  be  a  double  crumb.  It  is  not  an  atom,  but  a 
little  heap  of  two  atoms.  Instead  of  being  a  penny 
it  is  two  halfpennies  stuck  together  like  the  Siamese 
Twins.  And  each  halfpenny  is  a  logical  atom. — 
One  is  tempted  to  add  Euclid's  Q.  E.  D. 

By  similar  reasoning  the  atoms  of  hydrogen  and 


122  THe  New  Word 

chlorine  have  also  been  revealed  as  twins  ;  and 
should  occasion  arise  for  it  no  doubt  the  twins  will 
become  triplets,  and  the  halfpennies  farthings.  In 
this  way  the  integrity  of  the  logical  atom  should 
always  be  maintained. 

Meanwhile  I  will  commend  to  the  attention  of  all 
atomists  the  Chinese  definition  of  a  Point.  "A 
point  is  a  thing  which  has  not  got  division.  " 

Such  is  the  story  of  the  Atom  ;  and  we  cannot 
be  surprised  if  the  historian  of  Creation  has  been 
caught  tripping  in  the  network  of  arithmetic,  logic 
and  imagination,  which  I  have  laboured  to  unweave, 
in  the  belief  that  what  can  be  said  in  shorthand 
can  be  said  In  longhand,  If  wc  take  the  pains. 


Ill 


The  Story  of  Creation  now  leaves  the  crumbs,  to 
bring  upon  the  scene  a  new  item  inexcusably  omitted 
from  the  inventory  of  the  universe.  This  is  an  "  elas- 
tic medium  "  called  Ether,  something  as  much  finer 
than  air  as  the  crumbs  are  finer  than  bricks.  So  that, 
ridding  my  mind  of  the  words  "  very  small " — which 
can  only  mean  small  beside  a  man — I  learn  that  the 
All-Thing  is  a  sort  of  jelly  with  bricks  jostling  each 
other  inside  It  under  the  stress  of  that  Power  which 
formed  the  second  item  in  the  inventory. 

The  Ether,  it  seems,  is  a  "necessary  assumption"; 
it  Is  Indeed  a  sort  of  dustbin   into  which  Science 


Physics:  The  Knot  123 

throws  her  breakages.  I  understand,  however,  from 
other  sources  of  information,  that  the  dustbin  is  be- 
coming cholced,  and  that  Science  has  now  called  for 
another,  and  far  finer  medium,  to  be  called  Ethereon, 
which  will  trickle  through  the  Ether  as  that  trickles 
through  the  air,  and  as  water  trickles  through  a 
sponge.  Nor  shall  I  be  surprised  to  hear  later  on 
that  even  in  the  Ethereon  Science  has  not  got  quite 
to  the  bottom  of  Everything,  and  that  finer  and  finer 
mediums,  Etheroids  and  Ethereonoids  and  Ethero- 
lites,  will  go  on  trickling  through  each  other  to  end- 
lessness. The  world  is  held  up  by  an  elephant,  and 
the  elephant  is  held  up  by  a  tortoise,  and  the  tortoise 
is  held  up  by — what? 


IV 


In  the  meanwhile  the  story  of  Matter  has  not 
ended  with  the  crumb. 

The  crumb  has  been  guessed  by  no  mean  guesser 
to  be  made  of  Ether,  to  be  a  sort  of  ring  made  by 
a  whirlpool  in  the  Ether,  which  has  somehow  got  Its 
tail  into  its  mouth  like  a  fried  whiting.  That  guess 
no  longer  holds  the  field. 

According  to  the  last  report  I  have  received  from 
the  headquarters  of  science — a  report  which  has 
caused  much  of  my  language  in  the  first  draft  of 
this  Letter  to  take  an  air  of  plagiarism — the  crumb 
is  made  up  of  electricity,  which  is  to  say,  amber- 


124  The  New  Word 

strength.  This  strength  shows  two  sides,  or  ways, 
called  yea  and  nay,  and  both  join  to  shape  the  crumb. 
The  crumb  is  a  relatively  big  ball  of  yea  strength 
inside  which  a  swarm  of  lesser  balls  of  nay  strength 
are  going  round  and  round,  the  little  balls  having 
between  them  as  much  of  nay  as  the  bigger  ball  has 
of  yea.     I  give  the  learned  words  : — 

"The  hydrogen  atom  consists  of  a  big  sphere  of 
uniformly  distributed  positive  electrification,  and  a 
thousand  negative  corpuscles  travelling,  each  in  Its 
own  orbit,  within  the  positive  sphere.  The  total  of 
positive  electrification  is  equal  to  the  sum  of  the  neg- 
atives In  the  thousand  corpuscles." 

Such  Is  the  Image  of  Matter  formed  in  the  mind 
of  a  great  scientist,  too  true  a  scientist  to  offer  it  as 
anything  but  a  guess.  It  may  not  be  the  right  guess. 
It  is  not  there,  perhaps,  that  pretty  Chinese  toy,  those 
wheels  within  a  wheel,  that  dance  of  moons  within 
the  belly  of  their  sun.  The  pick  of  Science  has  gone 
too  deep,  and  struck  the  well  of  poetry.  But  as  It 
stands  It  is  the  last  and  best  guess  that  science  has 
made  in  our  time  about  the  ultimate  nature  of  Mat- 
ter. 

And  what  else  Is  It  but  a  network — a  thousand 
knots  tied  up  In  one  knot?  The  pick  of  the  physicist 
has  chimed  against  the  pick  of  the  psychologist,  as 
in  the  middle  of  a  tunnel,  and  wrought  a  thor- 
oughfare for  light.  And  that  is  what  I  call  a 
Rhyme. 

Of  what  Is  the  network  made?    Let  us  hear  the 


Physics:  The  Knot  125 

last  word  of  Materialism  on  itself. — "  Matter  is 
electric  charge,  or  electric  charge  Is  Matter,  which- 
ever way  we  like  to  put  it." 

The  ultimate  nature  of  Matter  is  Power.     The 
inventory  of  the  universe  was  too  long  by  half. 


NINTH  HEAD 


THE   DEMON   IN   THE   STONE 

Force  and  Energy. — i.  The  Quarrel  of  the  Twins. — 
2.  Pulling  and  Pushing. — 3.  The  Gadarene  Swine. — 
4.     Why  a  Stone  Falls — 5.     Witchcraft. 

T  FIND  It  Harder  to  write  about  strength  than 
about  shapes,  for  the  same  reason  that  I  find  It 
harder  to  explain  the  word  idealist  than  the  word 
dynamite. 

The  author  of  the  Story  of  Creation,  on  the  other 
hand,  seems  to  have  approached  his  second  topic 
with  peculiar  confidence,  and  as  one  who  had  made 
it  his  own;  for  in  his  preface  he  has  undertaken  to 
give  "  rigid  and  definite  meanings "  to  the  words 
Force  and  Energy;  a  service  so  great  that  he  him- 
self perhaps  does  not  see  how  great  it  is. 

However,  his  teaching  on  this  head  is  not  wholly 
his  own.  He  is  less  an  inventor  than  a  legislator, 
bringing  order  into  the  realm  of  scientific  thought. 


Unlike  that  other  lawgiver,  whose  Story  of  Crea- 
tion still  finds  readers,  the  present  writer  begins  his 

126 


Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     127 

stiff  and  inclosed  explanations  of  Force  and  Energy 
by  dropping  into  a  rather  unexpected,  and  surely 
needless,  vein  of  logic. 

"  If  atoms  are  unchangeable  under  their  present 
conditions,  and  changeable  only  in  their  relations 
through  combination  with  other  atoms,  it  follows 
that  all  changes  are  due  to  motion. " 

I  am  sorry  to  have  to  say  so,  but  I  cannot  make 
sense  of  that.  I  should  have  thought  the  changes  of 
the  unchangeable  atoms  were  their  motion.  If 
motion  is  not  change,  but  something  else  that  brings 
about  change,  we  ought  to  be  told  what  motion 
is.  And  that  is  just  what  we  are  not  told. 
The  author's  silence  on  this  head  is  all  the  more 
regrettable  inasmuch  as  the  rigid  and  definite  mean- 
ings given  to  Force  and  Energy  are  hinged  on  the 
word  motion. 

"  Power.  Motion  throughout  the  universe  is  pro- 
duced or  destroyed,  quickened  or  retarded,  increased 
or  lessened,  by  two  indestructible  powers  of  oppo- 
site nature  to  each  other — (a)  Force,  and  (b) 
Energy." 

And  so  there  is  not  one  Power  but  two  Powers, 
each  full-armed  and  deathless,  waging  everlasting 
war  with  one  another,  as  they  have  done  for  so 
many  ages,  under  other  names,  in  other  stories  of 


128  The  New  Word 

creation, — Immortal     Twins,      with     an     immortal 
Quarrel. 

Our  author  names  them  in  significant  disorder,  for 
he  means  that  motion  is  produced  by  (b)  Energy, 
and  destroyed  by  (a)  Force.  One  would  think  that 
motion  must  be  produced  before  it  can  be  destroyed, 
and  therefore  that  Energy  was  (a)  and  Force  was 
(b).  The  author,  it  is  plain,  was  thinking  when  he 
began  the  sentence,  and  so  he  wrote  like  an  Idealist. 
As  soon  as  he  left  off  thinking  he  dropped  Instinc- 
tively Into  Materialism. 

Now  what  are  Energy  and  Force  at  strife  about  ? 
Motion.  Between  them  they  are  worrying  motion 
like  two  dogs  worrying  a  bone.  Motion,  as  we  have 
just  read,  is  hard  at  work  causing  the  changes  in 
the  All-Thing.  But  these  angry  powers  will  not 
let  it  alone.  They  have  no  work  of  their  own,  be- 
cause motion  has  got  their  job,  and  so  they  set  upon 
motion  as  two  trades  unionists  set  upon  a  blackleg. 
One  of  them  produces  motion — out  of  what  we  are 
not  told,  but  I  expect  out  of  the  Ether  ;  the  other 
destroys  It.  One  quickens  and  increases  motion  ; 
the  other  first  retards  and  then  lessens  it. 

The  discovery  that  motion  can  be  retarded  without 
being  lessened,  or  lessened  without  being  retarded, 
is  perhaps  the  greatest  feat  of  scientific  terminology, 
forming  as  it  does  the  keystone  of  the  famous  Kinetic 
Molecular  Theory  of  Gases.  As  it  Is  rather  puz- 
zling to  the  untrained  mind,  I  shall  take  pains  to  ex- 
plain it  later  on. 


^Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone    129 


II 


The  meanings  given  to  the  terms  Force  and 
Energy  in  the  Story  of  Creation  may  be  rigid  and 
definite,  but  they  are  a  little  hard  to  find. 

Force,  the  book  says,  binds  together  bits  of  "  pon- 
derable matter."  This  was  the  first  hint  to  me  that 
there  were  two  kinds  of  Matter,  one  which  had 
weight,  and  another  which  had  none.  I  am  sorry  to 
add  that  neither  in  this  place,  nor  elsewhere  in  the 
book,  have  I  been  able  to  glean  the  least  information 
about  the  second  kind,  the  imponderable  Matter.  I 
only  know  that  there  is  such  a  thing,  because  my 
teacher  says  again  that — "  Force  inheres  in,  and  can 
never  be  taken  from,  ponderable  Matter." 

I  did  not  try  to  understand  the  learned  words 
Gravitation,  Cohesion  and  Affinity,  which  my  guide 
used  as  the  names  for  various  forms  of  what  he 
called  attraction.  Attraction,  I  saw  at  once,  was  the 
Mediterranean  way  of  writing  pull-towards  ;  and 
hence  I  understood  at  length  that  Force  must  be 
strength  pulling-to,  and  Energy  must  be  strength 
pushing-fro. 

These  twain  seemed  at  first  to  be  counterparts  of 
one  another,  yet  the  Story  of  Creation  went  on  to 
show  that  they  were  very  much  otherwise. 

To  begin  with,  the  Pull  strength  was  bound  up  in 
Matter  so  that  it  could  not  be  shifted  ;  whereas  the 


130  The  N'ew  Word 

Push  was  not  so  bound  up,  and  you  could  take  it 
from  one  bit  of  Matter,  and  give  it  to  another  bit. 
Thus,  if  water  were  falling  under  the  mere  Pull  of 
the  earth,  as  Newton  believed,  you  could  not  make 
it  turn  a  mill-wheel,  and  grind  corn  ;  whereas  if 
It  were  being  pushed  uphill,  you  could.  This  was 
worth  knowing  becauS'C  for  thousand  of  years  mil- 
lers with  untrained  minds,  men  for  whom  the  terms 
Force  and  Energy  have  not  got  rigid  and  definite 
meanings,  have  been  making-believe  to  turn  mill- 
wheels  and  grind  corn  in  that  wrong  way,  and 
making  what  one  fears  must  be  ideal  bread. 

Another  serious  consequence  was  that,  while  the 
Pull  always  stopped  in  its  own  bit  of  Matter,  and 
so  was  safe,  the  Push,  through  being  handled,  and 
carried  hither  and  thither,  and  slopped  about  all 
over  the  place,  so  to  speak,  was  gradually  getting 
*'  dissipated,"  that  is  to  say,  split,  in  the  Ether.  And 
although  my  teacher  rather  shirked  this  alarming 
feature  of  the  business,  he  hinted  darkly  that  some- 
thing might  have  to  be  said  about  it  later  on,  when 
the  Story  of  Creation  drew  to  its  end,  or,  in  his  own 
menacing  words, — ^^"when  the  ultimate  destiny  of 
the  universe  is  considered." 

But  by  far  the  most  interesting  difference  between 
the  two  Powers  was  this,  that  whereas  there  seemed 
to  be  only  one  kind  of  Pull,  which  pulled,  there  were 
two  kinds  of  Push,  one  which  pushed,  and  another 
which  could  push  if  it  liked,  but  did  not.  I  give 
the  writer's  words: — 


Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     131 

"Energy  Is  of  two  kinds,  active  and  passive,  or  in 
the  terms  of  science,  kinetic  and  potential." 

I  am  bound  to  say  that  here  I  disliked  my  author's 
terms  less  than  those  of  science.  Kinetic  sounds  like 
Greek,  and  potential  sounds  like  Latin,  and  I  do  not 
see  why  science  should  mix  up  two  Mediterranean 
languages  in  order  to  express  such  simple  meanings 
as  going  and  still. 

At  this  point,  I  am  glad  to  say,  my  teacher  passed 
from  words  to  things,  and  gave  m.e  some  examples 
of  the  mysterious  unpushing  Push.  They  are  a 
stone  lying  on  the  roof  of  a  house,  or  on  a  mountain  ; 
a  clock  wound  up  but  not  going;  a  bed  of  coal, 
and  a  barrel  of  gunpowder.  "This  (he  goes 
on)  becomes  kinetic  when  the  stone  falls,  the 
clock  goes,  the  coal  burns,  or  the  gunpowder  ex- 
plodes." 

I  shall  take  the  first  of  these  examples,  because 
it  Is  the  simplest,  and  because  I  have  met  with  it 
elsewhere.  Of  the  others,  I  will  only  remark  In 
passing,  first,  that  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  a 
clock  wound  up  but  not  going — the  hands  may  not 
be  going,  but  assuredly  the  spring  is  being  worn  out 
in  Its  effort  to  move  the  hands  ;  secondly,  that  there 
is  no  more  energy,  going  or  otherwise,  in  a  bed  of 
coal  than  in  a  feather  bed,  or  a  flower  bed,  or  any 
other  kind  of  bed — indeed  the  flower  bed  grows  the 
tree  that  turns  Into  the  coal  ;  and  thirdly,  that  there 
Is  a  far  more  mysterious  -energy  In  a  barrel  of  beer 
than  in  a  barrel  of  gunpowder  ;  for  the  barrel  of 


132  The  New  Word 

gunpowder  can  only  blow  a  man  to  pieces,  whereas 
the  barrel  of  beer  can  make  him  see  double  ;  and 
so  wc  make  that  "passage  from  chemistry  to  con- 
sciousness "  which  the  author  pretended  in  his  pref- 
ace we  could  not  make. 


Ill 

I  first  met  the  stone  lying  on  the  roof  of  a  house, 
in  a  little  book  on  the  Conservation  of  Energy,  in 
which  it  was  credited  with  Energy  of  Position.  I 
had  never  understood  very  well  what  that  could  be, 
and  I  understood  it  no  better  when  it  was  called 
Potential  Energy.  I  understood  that  such  a  stone 
had  weight  ;  but  that  was  mere  Force,  or  Pulling 
strength.  What  was  this  Latin  energy;  and  how 
did  the  stone  get  it  ;  and  how  was  a  stone  lying  on 
the  roof  of  a  house  or  on  a  mountain,  different  from 
any  other  stone  ? 

The  answer  seemed  to  be  that  the  stone  could  fall, 
when  its  Latin  Energy  would  become  Greek.  In 
other  words,  if  you  took  away  the  house,  or  the 
mountain,  the  stone  would  fall,  not  by  its  own 
weight,  but  because  it  was  being  pushed  downwards, 
just  as  if  I  should  pick  up  a  stone  and  throw  it  down. 
But  if  that  were  so,  how  was  I  to  tell  the  difference 
between  this  Energy  that  made  stones  fall  from  the 
roofs  of  houses,  and  the  Force  that  made  you  and 
me  fall,  and  everything  fall  ?    Newton  would  have 


Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     133 

been  surprised,  I  fancy,  to  learn  that  his  famous 
apple  fell  because  of  its  energy.  But  perhaps 
apples  on  trees  have  not  got  Energy  of  Position; 
only  apples  on  the  roof  of  a  house. 

I  should  have  liked  to  ask  these  learned  and  dis- 
tinguished writers  whether  a  stone  lying,  not  on  a 
roof,  but  on  the  ground,  had  any  of  this  enchanted 
Energy  ;  or  a  stone  lying,  not  on  a  mountain,  but  on 
a  plain.  And  if  not,  how  high  must  the  stone  be  to 
get  it.  I  wanted  to  know  where  Energy  of  Posi- 
tion left  off,  and  Force  began.  If  you  should  put  a 
stone  in  a  basket,  and  lower  it  halfway  down  a  well, 
would  that  stone  have  Energy  of  Position  ?  It 
seemed  to  me  that  you  might  go  right  down  to  the 
middle  of  the  earth,  finding  nothing  but  Energy  of 
Position  all  the  way.  I  was  tempted  to  fear  that 
there  must  be  a  mistake  in  the  Story  of  Creation; 
and  that  it  was  really  this  Energy  that  inhered  in, 
and  could  never  be  taken  from,  ponderable  Matter. 
Thus  the  rigid  and  definite  m'caning  of  Force  had 
turned  out  to  be — Potential  Energy.  Perhaps  the 
author  has  written  here  more  truly  than  he  knew. 

Yet  I  think  it  -evident  that  to  the  trained  mind 
there  is  something  peculiar  and  fascinating  about 
stones  lying  on  the  roof  of  a  house  ;  they  have  a 
charm  that  other  stones  have  not.  The  magic  attri- 
bute is  called  by  one  of  my  authorities  *'  advantage 
over  a  Force,"  namely  the  Force  of  Gravity.  But 
then  it  seems  to  the  untrained  mind  that  all  the  tiles 
of  the  roof,  and  the  house  itself  for   that   matter, 


134  The  New  Word 

have  the  same  advantage.  The  real  advantage 
which  the  stone  lying  on  the  roof  of  a  house  has  over 
a  stone  lying  on  the  ground  Is  your  advantage, 
because  it  is  easier  for  you  to  throw  a  stone  down- 
wards than  upwards.  But  in  both  of  those  cases  it 
is  your  energy  that  moves  the  stone,  with  its  own 
weight  added  in  one  case,  and  subtracted  in  the 
other. 

However  that  is  just  what  science,  speaking 
through  the  mouth  of  its  priests,  will  not  allow. 
According  to  them,  when  you  throw  the  stone  down 
there  is  some  other  power  at  work  besides  your 
push  and  the  earth's  pull;  there  is  this  mysterious 
Potential  Energy  which  has  been  inside  the  stone 
all  the  time.  It  S'cems  to  be  a  scientific  case  of 
demon-possession.  The  demon  of  Latin  Energy 
enters  into  some  stones  but  not  others.  It  prefers 
stones  on  the  roof  of  a  house  if  it  can  get  them,  but 
if  not,  it  will  take  stones  on  mountains,  just  as 
the  demons  in  the  gospel,  when  they  were  cast  out  of 
the  man,  entered  into  the  swine.  It  is  remarkable 
that  those  demons  behaved  very  much  like  Energetic 
ones,  for  they  drove  the  swine  violently  down  a 
steep  place  into  the  sea. 

I  hope  It  Is  not  irreverent  to  say  that  I  do  not 
believe  in  this  Gadarene  Energy.  I  do  not  sec  why 
it  should  be  called  in  to  do  the  work  that  Force  is 
already  doing.  It  would  be  just  as  easy  to  discover 
a  kind  of  Force  that  would  do  what  Energy — the 
Greek  Energy  that  Is    energetic — does.     Force    Is 


Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     135 

pulling  things  towards  the  middle  of  the  earth.  But 
everything  does  not  get  there.  Some  bits  of  Matter 
get  in  front  and  push  the  others  back.  And  the 
power  by  which  they  do  so  is  not  Energy,  it  is  Force 
of  Position. 

I  can  even  find  another  magic  stone,  as  an  example, 
a  stone  falling  into  a  glass  of  water.  As  the  stone 
falls  down  it  will  push  the  water  up.  Here  is  a 
plain  case  of  Latin  Force,  the  Force  that  does  what 
you  would  expect  energy  to  do. 

IV 

The  Story  of  Creation  does  not  end  here,  unhap- 
pily. For  its  author,  not  content  with  his  Potential 
Energy,  which  does  what  Force  was  doing,  has  gone 
on  to  invent  yet  another  kind  of  energy,  which  does 
the  whole  work  over  again. 

He  does  this  very  easily.  For  just  as  he  first 
divided  Power  into  Force  and  Energy,  and  next 
divided  Energy  into  going  and  stopping  Energy,  so 
now  he  goes  on  to  divide  the  going,  or,  as  one  might 
say  the  Energetic  Energy,  again  into  three  kinds, 
one  of  which  does  what  Force  and  Unenergetic 
Energy  both  do. 

"Each  kind  of  kinetic  Energy  has  separating, 
combining  and  neutral  motion.  Example  of  Sep- 
arative— a  stone  thrown  upwards  ;  example  of  Com- 
bining— a  stone  falling  ;  example  of  Neutral — a  top 
spinning  in  the  same  place," 


136  The  New  Word 

So,  therefore,  what  really  makes  the  stone  fall  is 
neither  Force  nor  Latin  Energy,  but  Greek  Energy 
which  is  going  the  wrong  way  ; — shall  I  call  it  Anti- 
energetic  Energy  ? 

And  I  see  no  reason  why  the  learned  writer  should 
not  have  carried  his  scientific  terms,  with  their  rigid 
and  definite  meanings,  a  good  deal  farther.  For 
after  the  stone  has  fallen  it  is  likely  to  bound  up 
again,  and  that  will  clearly  be  an  example  of  Redls- 
tributive,  or  Ultra-Energetic,  Energy.  And  then  it 
will  be  almost  sure  to  fall  again  under  the  stress  of 
iKatasynthetic  Energy  ;  unless  it  should  happen  to 
lodge  on  the  roof  of  a  house,  and  thereby  offer  a 
rare  example  of  Extrapotential,  not  to  say  Extrava- 
gant, Energy. 

The  whole  of  this  laboured  nonsense  flows  from 
a  mistake  at  starting,  the  mistake  of  trying  to  think 
of  strength  as  two  rigid  and  definite  and  indestruc- 
tible strengths  ;  whereas  strength  is  like  a  wave  with 
two  faces  which  are  neither  rigid  nor  definite  nor 
indestr^ictlble,  but  are  forever  changing  into  one 
another,  as  the  wave's  crest  becomes  the  trough, 
and  the  trough,  the  crest ;  and  Force  and  Energy 
are  not  two  Powers,  but  two  names  for  one  Power, 
working  To  and  Fro. 

The  author  of  the  Story  of  Creation  has  let  his 
mind  be  tripped  up  by  bad  language.  It  Is  not 
worse  language  than  that  of  other  text-books  ;  I 


Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     137 

chose  his  book  because  it  claimed  to  be  better  writ- 
ten than  other  books,  to  be  indeed  a  schoolbook  ; 
and  language  that  would  be  bad  In  any  book  is 
damnable  in  a  schoolbook.  If  the  teacher's  words 
trip  up  his  own  mind,  what  must  they  do  to  the 
child's  mind  ?  Has  not  Topelius  given  us  a  glimpse 
in  his  delightful  story  of  the  little  boy  fresh  from  his 
first  geography  lesson,  trying  to  talk  to  the  maid- 
servant in  words  like  oblate  spheroid  and  equator  ? 

As  soon  as  men,  however  learned  and  distin- 
guished, put  their  minds  to  sleep  with  Mediterranean 
words,  they  begin  to  gabble  like  little  Walter. 
While  they  are  talking  in  Babu,  they  are  thinking 
like  Andronikos  of  Rhodes.  Let  us  see  if  we  can 
understand  them  any  better  than  they  understand 
themselves. 

What  they  are  really  thinking  of  all  this  time  is 
not  a  stone  on  a  mountain,  which  of  course  has  no 
more  energy  than  the  rest  of  the  mountain,  but  a 
loose  stone,  in  other  words,  a  stone  that  is  going  to 
fall.  The  stone  on  the  house-roof  would  never  have 
become  a  scientific  problem,  unless  It  had  slipped 
off  the  roof  on  to  the  ground.  It  is  what  happens 
when  It  reaches  the  ground  that  has  caused  all  the 
trouble.  The  learned  men  have  noticed  that  if  you 
drop  a  glass  test-tube  on  your  laboratory  floor  it 
is  more  likely  to  break  than  If  it  had  been  on  the 
floor  all  along.  They  have  been  struck  by  this 
interesting  fact,  which  even  children  have  noticed  in 
connection  with  their  toys  ;  and  they  have  wanted 


138  The  New  Word 

to  account  for  It.  And  finding  that  they  could  not 
account  for  It,  they  have  done  what  science  In  a  diffi- 
culty always  does,  they  have  lulled  their  minds  to 
sleep  with  spells  from  the  Greek  lexicon.  Hence  all 
this  demonology  and  witchcraft. 

Why  does  the  fallen  test-tube  break  ?  Why  does 
the  falling  stone  descend  as  though  It  were  being 
sucked  downwards  In  a  whirlpool — as  perhaps  It  Is  ? 
Why  does  the  stone  on  the  higher  slope  of  the 
mountain  fall  more  heavily,  as  If  its  elastic  had  been 
further  stretched  ?  It  cannot  be  mere  weight  that 
does  all  this,  because  the  falling  stone  Is  no  heavier 
than  any  other  stone.  The  answer  of  science  Is  that 
there  must  be  a  demon  In  the  stone  ;  and  it  Is  that 
demon  who  breaks  the  stone,  or  makes  It  bound  up 
again,  or.  If  the  stone  be  flint  and  fall  upon  another 
flint,  strikes  out  a  spark — the  demon  In  his  fiery 
shape. 

If  that  be  so,  how  did  the  demon  get  into  the 
stone  ? 

Here  Is  the  riddle  they  have  got  to  read.  Once 
upon  a  time  a  demon  used  to  'enter  into  the  stone 
while  It  was  falling  through  the  air,  and  the  name 
of  that  demon  was  Momentum,  which  is  to  say, 
being  Interpreted,  Rush.  In  these  days  that  demon 
of  the  air  has  been  exorcised,  but  only  to  make  room 
for  a  far  more  subtle  fiend,  the  Demon  of  the  House- 
Roof.  This  demon  does  not  wait  till  the  stone 
begins  to  fall  ;  no,  he  was  there  all  the  time  lurking 
inside  it,  while  It  was  lying  there  so   quietly    and 


'Dynamics:  The  Demon  in  the  Stone     139 

peacefully  among  the  Christian  tiles.  Then  how  did 
this  demon  get  into  the  stone  ? 

There  stands  the  riddle,  and  the  learned  men  think 
that  they  have  read  it,  as  they  think  they  have  read 
other  riddles,  by  muttering  something  that  sounds 
uncommonly  like  hie  haec  hoc. 

But  they  have  not  told  us  how  the  demon  got  into 
the  stone. 

The  one  sound  example  of  Energy  of  Position 
is  that  of  the  scale  in  which  you  balance  a  pound 
of  meat  by  an  ounce  weight  at  the  end  of  a  lever. 
And  as  soon  as  we  utter  the  word  lever,  lo  !  the 
Energetic  demon  is  conjured  back  into  the  Ethereal 
dustbin.  We  are  talking,  not  metaphysics,  but 
mechanics,  and  measuring  the  ways  of  strength 
instead  of  pretending  to  account  for  them.  The 
strength  with  which  a  falling  stone  strikes  the 
ground  is  its  weight,  multiplied  by  the  height  from 
which  it  fell.  So  much  we  know,  the  rest  is  ta  meta 
ta  phusika  and  hie  haec  hoc. 

All  this  is  not  really  science,  but  only  Scientology. 
It  is  language.  It  is  the  magic  lullaby  in  which  the 
shapes  of  things  melt  and  reshape  themselves  for- 
ever. And  so,  when  we  would  try  to  stop  that 
wheel  we  call  the  mind,  and  look  between  the  spokes, 
at  once  the  All-Thing  in  its  turn  begins  to  spin  about 
us,  and  all  which  it  contains  to  slide  and  glide 
away: — as  in  that  wondrous  story  of  creation 
handed  down  from  Finnish  sorcerers  of  old,  when 
the  wizard  Lemminkainen  com-es  into  the  hall  and 


'I40  The  New  Word 

sings  ;  and  while  he  sings  the  swords  vanish  out  of 
the  hands  of  the  feasters,  and  the  cups  vanish  from 
their  lips,  and  the  tables  and  the  walls  melt  and  fade, 
and  lastly  the  hall  itself  and  all  within  it  melt  and 
fade  away,  and  only  the  magic  song  goes  on. 


TENTH  HEAD 


THE  MAN  IN  THE  CRUMB 

Young  Cameron. — I.  A  Famous  Cryptogram. — 
2.  Perfect  Elasticity. — 3.  Ideal  Crumbs. — 4.  Faith. — 
5.     Boyle's  Laiv  Accounted  for. 

T  EST  I  should  be  misled  about  materialism  by 
•■■^  keeping  to  one  book,  and  that  one  written  by 
a  man  of  letters  rather  than  a  practical  scientist,  I 
went  out  into  the  street,  and  was  fortunate  enough 
to  find  another  with  the  tempting  title — Chemical 
Theory  for  Beginners. 

This  time  there  could  be  no  mistake  ;  the  book 
was  a  real  school-book,  and  it  had  belonged  to  a  real 
school-boy  ;  I  found  his  name,  Cameron,  and  the 
name  of  his  school,  on  the  fly-leaf.  It  was  the  work 
of  two  learned  specialists  on  the  staff  of  a  famous 
university.  In  England  the  publisher  is  more 
important  than  the  author,  and  this  book  was  pub- 
lished by  the  most  important  publisher  in  England. 
It  was  published  in  the  year  of  Nobel's  death. 

As  we  have  seen,  there  is  a  slight  cloud  over  the 
Story  of  Creation.  If  it  is  not  under  lock  and  key 
in  the  Free  Librari-es,  there  must  be  many  wha 
would  like  to  be  so.  But  not  one  would  dream'  of 
locking  up  the  Chemical  Theory  for  Beginners.  It 
is  perfectly  respectable.     It  is  a  book  that  might  have 

141 


142  The  New  Word 

been  written  by  a  bishop.  Its  contents  are  taught  to 
the  sons  of  bishops  in  the  most  conservative  schools 
in  England.  They  are  taught  alongside  of  the 
Catechism  of  the  Church  of  England.  And  yet 
they  are  not  one  whit  less  materialistic  than  what  we 
have  been  reading.  The  passage  I  have  picked  out 
for  examination  is  a  chief  cornerstone  of  the  Mate- 
rialistic Faith.  The  schoolmasters  have  dealt  with 
young  Cameron  fairly,  according  to  their  lights. 
They  have  treated  his  mind  as  if  it  were  a  badger's 
pit.  You  put  in  the  badger,  and  you  put  in  the  dog, 
and  you  wait  to  see  which  comes  out  first.  They 
have  thrown  in  the  Catechism,  and  they  have  thrown 
in  the  Chemical  Theory,  and  now  they  are  waiting 
to  see  whether  Cameron  will  turn  out  a  Christian  or 
an  Atheist. 

I  got  this  book  to  learn  what  young  Cameron  had 
to  learn,  whether  he  liked  it  or  not,  about  Going 
Crumbs. 


The  Going  Crumb  has  been  invented  to  account 
for  an  interesting  fact  which  any  one  may  examine 
for  himself, — what  science  calls  a  law.  In  one  of 
my  authorities  it  is  thus  stated. 

"  Gases  arc  highly  elastic.  According  to  Boyle's 
Law  the  volume  of  a  gas  is  inversely  as  the  pressure, 
whilst  the  density  and  elastic  force  are  directly  as  the 
pressure  and  inversely  as  the  volume." 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     143 

That  is  to  say,  in  homely  words,  the  more  you 
squeeze  gas,  the  more  it  will  shrink,  and  the  more  it 
will  squeeze  back.  Elastic  is  not  a  very  good  word  ; 
the  gas  behaves  more  like  a  spring  shutting  up  than 
a  piece  of  elastic.  Nor  is  the  statement  quite  true  ; 
Boyle's  Law  is  sometimes  broken,  like  real  laws. 
However  the  fact  itself  is  very  simple,  so  simple  that 
learned  men  felt  they  must  account  for  it.  So  they 
set  to  work,  and  as  we  should  expect  them  to  do 
when  they  want  to  make  anything  that  is  simple 
yet  more  simple,  they  began  by  taking  down  the 
Greek  lexicon. 

They  called  their  explanation  the  Kinetic  Molec- 
ular Theory. 

The  English  for  that,  as  far  as  I  can  make  out, 
is  the  Going  Crumb  View.  I  am  not  sure  that  I 
ought  not  to  write  Belief  instead  of  View.  I  am 
afraid  that  Cameron  believes  that  he  has  really 
viewed  the  going  crumbs.  Only  Ulysses  can  listen 
in  safety  to  the  siren's  song. 

We  will  read  over  this  famous  spell. 

"  According  to  this  theory  the  particles  of  a  gas — 
which  are  identical  with  the  chemical  molecules — 
are  practically  independent  of  each  other,  and  are 
briskly  moving  in  all  directions  in  straight  lines.  It 
frequently  happens  that  the  particles  encounter  each 
other,  and  also  the  walls  of  the  vessel  containing 
them  ;  but  as  they  are  supposed  to  behave  like  per- 
fectly elastic  bodies,  there  is  no  loss  to  their  energy 


144  The  New  Word 

of  motion  in  such  encounters,  merely  their  direc- 
tions and  relative  velocities  being  changed  by  the 
collision. 

"  The  pressure  exerted  by  a  gas  on  the  vessel  con- 
taining it,  is  due  to  the  impacts  of  the  gas  molecules 
on  the  walls  of  the  vessel.  On  this  hypothesis  we 
can  easily  account  for  Boyle's  Law." 

And  so  these  learned  men  have  accounted  for  the 
gas  being  highly  elastic  by  supposing  that  its 
crumbs  are  perfectly  elastic  ;  and  all  they  now  have 
to  do  is  to  account  for  the  crumbs  being  perfectly 
elastic. 

But  there  is  more  in  this  View  than  meets  the 
eye.  The  cryptogram  has  been  put  together  with  a 
cunning  that,  in  a  Jesuit  casuist,  would  be  considered 
fraud.  Let  us  see  if  we  can  unriddle  it,  bearing  in 
mind  that  whatever  reverence  is  due  to  the  sophists, 
or  the  casuists,  of  science,  a  greater  reverence  is 
due  to  Cameron. 

II 

I  will  put  aside  the  straight  lines  at  once  with  the 
remark  that  real  crumbs  do  not  move  in  straight 
lines, — only  ideal  crumbs  do  so.  It  was  careless  of 
the  distinguished  writers  to  use  an  English  word  like 
straight.  A  bright  boy  would  have  found  them  out 
at  once.  Another  time  they  had  better  write 
rectilinear. 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     145 

Now  let  us  see  what  Is  happening.  A  swarm  of 
racket-balls  are  flying  this  way  and  that  inside  a 
racket-court,  and  trying  to  get  out.  They  bump 
against  each  other,  and  against  the  wall,  and  when 
they  bump  they  change  their  "  relative  "  velocities. 
But  as  they  are  supposed  to  be  made  of  "perfect 
elastic  "  they  do  not  lose  their  "  Energy  of  Motion." 

The  word  relative  is  the  first  trap,  and  we  must 
begin  by  getting  rid  of  it.  Nothing  is  going  but  the 
elastic  racket-balls.  The  only  relation  is  between 
the  speed  of  one  ball,  and  the  speed  of  another.  The 
only  way  in  which  they  can  change  their  relative 
velocities  is  by  one  ball  going  faster,  and  the  other 
slower,  by  one  ball  gaining  speed,  and  the  other 
losing  it.  We  must  be  firm  with  the  scientific  wiz- 
ards here.  We  must  not  allow  them  to  create 
crumbs  that  can  change  their  relative  velocities  with- 
out changing  their  velocities. 

We  now  have  to  follow  the  racket-ball  that  has 
got  the  worst  of  the  encounter.  We  must  watch  this 
crippled  warrior  very  closely  as  he  limps  out  of  the 
fray,  for  a  strange  thing  is  about  to  happen  to  him. 

When  real  racket-balls  bump,  no  matter  what 
elastic  they  are  made  of,  they  will  lose  speed,  and 
after  they  have  bumped  each  other,  and  bumped  the 
wall  of  the  racket-court,  often  enough  they  will  slow 
down  and  stop.  But  this  ideal  racket-ball  is  not 
allowed  to  slow  down  and  stop,  because,  if  it  should, 
the  gas  would  cease  to  be  gas.  It  would  have  to  go 
out  into  the  Ether.    To  save  it  from  that  fate,  after 


.146  The  New  Word 

a  time  the  beaten  crumb  gets  Its  breath  again,  and 
goes  on  as  fast  as  ever.  How  is  this  cure  effected  ? 
Who  puts  the  lame  man  on  his  legs  again,  and  fur- 
nishes the  wounded  bird  with  fresh  wings  to  fly? 

According  to  this  View,  the  Good  Samaritan  is 
perfect  elasticity.  But  if  perfect  elasticity  can  save 
a  racket-ball  from  stopping,  it  should  also  save  it 
from  slowing.  Prevention  is  better  than  cure.  If 
perfect  elasticity  is  not  at  hand  when  it  is  really 
needed,  to  bring  off  the  crumb  harmless  from  its 
encounter,  it  is  too  late  for  it  to  come  on  the  scene 
afterwards,  and  try  to  revive  the  flagging  spirits  of 
the  sufferer  to  their  former  briskness.  We  must 
draw  the  line  somewhere,  even  in  a  scientific  hypoth- 
esis. We  may  allow  the  wizards  their  perfect  elas- 
ticity, though  we  may  have  our  private  doubts  as  to 
whether  there  is  such  a  thing,  and  whether  they  un- 
derstand what  they  mean  by  it.  But  elasticity  that 
made  a  slowing  india-rubber  ball  put  on  a  spurt  In 
the  middle  of  the  air  would  be  repeating  elasticity. 
We  must  be  firm  here  also.  We  must  not  allow  all 
the  other  laws  of  nature,  and  of  grammar,  to  be  set 
aside  to  account  for  Boyle's  not-quite-true  Law. 

The  words  perfect  elasticity  in  this  connection  are 
another  trap.  What  really  keeps  up  the  heart  of 
the  worsted  crumb,  and  sends  it  into  the  fight  again, 
this  time  with  better  luck,  Is  not  Its  elasticity  but  its 
Energy  of  Motion.  The  whole  magic  of  the  incan- 
tation is  here.  The  whole  art  of  the  ideal  racket- 
ball,  the  difference  between  It  and  other  racket-balls, 


Chemistry^:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     i/\.y 

is  that  it  can  lose  speed  without  losing  "Energy  of 
Motion." 

What  is  that,  messieurs   Clausius  and  Clerk  Max- 
well, if  you  please  ? 


Ill 


We  must  not  pin  down  the  word  Energy  to  Push, 
because  the  framers  of  the  cryptogram  may  not  have 
read,  or  may  not  have  believed,  the  Story  of  Crea- 
tion. I  will  write — Strength  of  Going.  What  is 
the  difference  between  that  and  Speed? 

The  word  speed,  or  in  Babu,  velocity,  is  not  an 
Andronlcan  one.  It  is  a  plain  term  of  measurement, 
like  length  and  weight,  and  it  is  used  in  measuring 
Energy  of  Motion.  We  measure  strength  by  meas- 
uring its  work,  and  speed  is  the  work  of  Energy  of 
Motion.  If  a  crumb,  or  a  racket-ball,  or  a  railway- 
train,  is  going  at  all,  it  is  going  through  space,  and 
in  time,  and  we  can  measure  the  strength  with  which 
it  is  going,  by  measuring  the  space  and  the  time,  and 
dividing  the  first  measure  by  the  second.  The  quo- 
tient, or  result,  is  called  the  speed  of  the  crumb  or  of 
the  train,  and  the  speed  exactly  corresponds  with  the 
Energy  of  Motion. 

If  a  railroad  train  has  slowed  down  on  account  of 
having  bumped  against  another  train  it  can  pick  up 
its  speed  again.     But  the  strength  which   enables 


148  The  New  Word 

it  to  do  so  Is  not  Energy  of  Motion,  but  Energy  of 
Steam.  In  order  to  distinguish  between  the  two 
we  have  only  to  uncouple  the  engine  from  the  rest 
of  the  train.  The  strength  left  in  the  train  is 
Energy  of  Motion,  and  the  train  will  run  as  long  as 
it  holds  out.  But  now  if  the  train  bumps  against 
another,  it  will  lose  part  of  its  Energy  of  Motion, 
and  we  can  measure  the  loss  of  energy  by  measur- 
ing the  loss  of  speed. 

The  words  "velocity"  and  "energy  of  motion," 
used  in  this  cryptogram,  mean  the  same  thing.  Its 
learned  framers,  of  course,  knew  this  as  well  as  I  do. 
What  they  must  have  meant  to  say  is  that  whatever 
speed  a  crumb  loses  by  bumping  against  a  slower 
crumb,  it  will  presently  regain  by  bumping  against 
a  faster  crumb,  and  so  the  total  velocity  among  the 
whole  of  the  crumbs  will  not  be  changed.  Unfortu- 
nately that  Is  not  what  they  have  said.  They  have 
left  Cameron  to  believe,  and  If  I  know  anything  of 
boys  or  men,  he  does  believe,  that  an  ideal  crumb 
can  go  as  strongly  as  ever  while  It  is  coming  to  a 
dead  stop,  and  as  weakly  as  ever  while  it  is  hurling 
through  space  at  the  rate  of  a  billion  diameters  of 
the  universe  in  the  trilllonth  of  a  second  of  time. 

Secrecy  is  said  by  the  lawyers  to  be  a  badge  of 
fraud.  This  cryptogram  is  a  fraud  upon  young 
Cameron,  because  it  does  not  tell  him  fairly  that 
there  is  a  man  in  the  Going  Crumb.  The  Going 
Crumb  View  is  another  example  of  scientific  anthro- 
pomorphism,   or    demonology.     What    makes    the 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     149 

crumb  go  ?  When  the  savage  sees  a  steam  engine 
going,  and  does  not  know  how  it  goes,  he  says  fairly 
enough  that  there  must  be  a  man  inside  it.  And 
indeed  there  is  a  man  inside  it,  a  man  named  Watt. 
That  is  what  Cameron  would  say  about  the  Going 
Crumb  if  he  were  given  the  chance  ;  and  most  likely 
he  would  be  right.  Science  is  determined  not  to 
give  him  the  chance,  and  in  order  to  blind  him,  and 
bewilder  him,  she  has  taken  the  dead  cipher  whose 
right  name  is  Speed,  and  dressed  it  up  in  an  old 
suit  of  clothes,  and  clapped  on  it  a  turnip's  head, 
and  an  old  hat,  and  stuck  a  candle  inside  it,  and 
called  it  Energy  of  Motion. 

The  Kinetic  Molecular  Theory  is  the  view  that 
crumbs  have  souls. 


IV 


The  Going  Crumb  View,  with  its  straight  lines, 
which  are  curves  ;  its  crumbs  which  are  images 
formed  in  the  mind  out  of  real  crumbs  and  arith- 
metical ciphers  ;  its  Andronican  elasticity,  its  man- 
faced  energy  of  motion,  and  its  double-faced  ve- 
locity ;  all  brought  together  to  account  for  a  not- 
quite-true  law  ;  is  a  fair  sample,  taken  at  haphazard, 
of  scientological  writing.  It  is  no  whit  better  than 
theological  writing.  And  unhappily  Scientology  is 
as  often  mistaken  for  science  as  theology  is  for  wor- 
ship. 


i^o  The  New  Word 

Since  it  was  for  young  Cameron's  sake  that  I  had 
wrestled  with  this  knot  of  words  I  made  the  experi- 
ment of  reading  over  my  notes  to  a  grown-up  Cam- 
eron. 

I  read  them  to  a  young  man  of  naturally  thought- 
ful mind,  who  had  taken  lessons  in  physical  science, 
which  I  have  never  been  fortunate  enough  to  do,  and 
who  was  disposed  in  consequence,  perhaps,  to  feel 
towards  me  some  of  that  distrust  which  a  trained 
mind  feels  towards  an  untrained  one. 

He  listened  to  me  patiently  till  I  came  to  the  word 
faith,  when  he  broke  in  rather  warmly. 

"That  is  most  unfair.  No  scientist  regards  a 
theory  as  a  faith.  He  is  always  ready  to  abandon 
it  the  moment  it  is  shown  to  be  unsound." 

I  thought  that  was  encouraging,  and  I  read  on. 
My  young  friend  allowed  what  I  had  said  about  the 
straight  lines,  though  I  found  it  was  news  to  him. 
We  had  a  misunderstanding  over  the  relative  veloci- 
ties, my  friend  being  very  anxious  to  bring  in  the 
word  mass,  which  does  not  occur  in  the  cryptogram. 
His  point  was  that  in  a  compound,  or  mixed,  gas 
the  crumbs  would  be  of  different  weight.  I  was 
patient  with  him,  and  after  a  long  argument  he 
allowed  me  to  take  the  case  of  an  unmixed  gas,  in 
which  the  crumbs  were  all  of  the  same  weight. 

In  the  end  we  got  to  the  words  "  perfectly  elastic," 
and  I  asked  my  young  friend  what  he  meant  by  the 
word  elastic. 

It  was  like  dropping  a    penny  in  an    automatic 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     151 

machine,  for  he  instantly  burst  out  with  a  shower 
of  words  like  "deformation,"  and  "minimum  of 
energy"  ;  and  I  had  to  stop  him,  and  say  that  such 
words  were  over  my  head,  and  that  they  did  not 
help  me  to  understand  the  word  elastic.  I  asked 
him  if  a  piece  of  elastic  were  elastic,  and  he  rather 
grudgingly  allowed  that  it  was.     Then  I  said, — 

"Let  us  stick  to  that,  and  we  shall  know  where 
we  are.  Now  what  is  meant  by  perfectly  elastic  ? 
Is  a  piece  of  india-rubber  that  yields  stubbornly,  and 
springs  back  strongly,  more  or  less  elastic  than  a 
piece  that  yields  easily  and  springs  back  weakly?" 

"  Both  are  equally  elastic, "  was  the  answer. 

"Then  anything  that  is  elastic  at  all  is  perfectly 
elastic  ?" 

My  young  friend  said  that  was  so.  Then  he 
changed  his  mind,  and  told  me  that  elasticity  was  a 
conception  perfectly  well  understood  by  scientists, 
and  that  it  had  nothing  to  do  with  real  elastic.  He 
began  to  draw  a  diagram  on  a  piece  of  paper  to 
make  the  conception  clear  to  me,  and  then  he  found 
the  diagram  did  not  make  it  any  clearer  to  himself, 
and  tore  it  up. 

My  enchanted  young  friend  went  away  at  last, 
more  firmly  convinced  of  his  theory  than  ever,  and 
promising  to  bring  me  a  really  good  book  on  physics 
that  would  tell  me  exactly  what  elasticity  was. — 
I  am  still  waiting  for  that  really  good  book  on 
physics. 

Unhappily  young  Cameron  is  waiting  too. 


1 52  The  New  Word 


My  aim  in  criticising  scientific  language  is  not  to 
hurt  science,  but  to  help  It,  I  am,  as  I  have  said, 
myself  a  scientist.  I  merely  act  on  the  altruistic 
principle  by  writing  against  my  own  side,  by  beating 
good  men  and  leaving  wicked  men  alone. 

It  Is  in  that  spirit  that  I  shall  now  go  on  to  show 
the  learned  authors  of  the  Chemical  Theory  for  Be- 
ginners that  their  cryptogram  does  less  than  justice 
to  the  Going  Crumbs. 

In  saying  that  crumbs  are  perfectly  elastic  they 
mean  that  when  they  strike  against  anything  hard, 
such  as  a  wall,  they  will  come  back  going  as  fast  as 
they  went.  That  Is  the  only  meaning  of  the  words, 
and  as  no  one  understands  very  much  about  elastic, 
it  would  have  been  better  to  call  the  crumbs  perfectly 
steady-going.  Of  course  no  crumbs  can  behave  like 
that,  but  in  a  scientific  hypothesis  possibility  Is  of  no 
consequence. 

In  this  case  the  chief  problem  Is  the  wall,  because 
It  is  the  terrible  and  ever-increasing  thumps  of  the 
Going  Crumbs  against  the  wall  of  the  containing 
vessel  that  account  for  Boyle's  Law.  It  is  expressly 
to  save  the  Going  Crumb  from  Injury  from  the  wall 
that  It  has  been  endowed  with  perfect  elasticity, — 
and  the  wall,  we  may  suppose,  with  perfect  rigidity, 
though  the  cryptogram  is  silent  on  that  point.  This 
is  the  armour  of  Achilles.     Clad  in  It,  the  Invulner- 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     153 

able  crumb  dashes  Itself  time  after  time  against  the 
immovable  wall  without  taking  the  least  hurt.  But 
now  what  happens  when  it  meets  another  crumb  ? 

We  have  answered  this  question  in  calling  the  wall 
rigid.  A  railway  train  that  overtakes  a  slower  train 
in  front  of  it,  is  better  off  than  if  it  ran  into  a  wall. 
But  that  is  because  it  wants  to  go  forward,  and  not 
back.  A  Going  Crumb  does  not  care  which 
way  it  goes  ;  all  it  wants  is  to  keep  up  its  speed. 
And  therefore  it  is  worse  off  when  it  overtakes  a 
slower  crumb,  and  has  to  push  it  along,  than  when 
it  strikes  the  wall.  It  is  no  good  being  perfectly 
elastic  when  you  strike  a  feather  bed.  It  is  like 
trying  to  lean  up  against  a  wall  that  is  falling  away 
from  you,  to  try  to  rebound  from  a  crumb  going  the 
same  way  as  yourself.  You  can  only  push  it  along, 
at  a  rate  representing  the  mean  between  its  speed 
and  yours.  We  have  merely  to  look  at  an  india- 
rubber  ball  striking  a  wall,  or  striking  the  net  of  a 
tennis  court,  to  see  the  difference. 

But  if  it  is  better  for  such  a  ball  to  strike  a  wall 
than  a  yielding  net,  it  is  better  still  for  it  to  strike 
a  tennis  racket  that  is  coming  towards  it.  In  that 
case  it  rebounds  with  all  its  own  strength,  and  the 
strength  of  the  racket,  or  of  the  tennis-player,  added 
as  a  kick  behind  ;  and  the  more  elastic  the  racket 
is,  and  the  harder  it  hits,  the  better  for  the  elastic 
ball.  I  am  not  a  very  good  elasticlan,  but  I  am 
clear  of  this  much,  that  when  two  Going  Crumbs, 
sheathed  in  enchanted  mail,  meet  each  other  in  full 


1^4  The  New  Word 

career,  the  speed  of  each  must  be  doubled  by  the 
encounter. 

What  is  the  consequence  of  these  mathematical 
truths  ?  Whenever  two  steady-going  crumbs  meet 
frontways  there  is  a  gain  of  speed  for  both.  When 
one  overtakes  another  from  behind,  there  is  a  loss 
of  speed  for  one,  but  what  it  loses  is  gained  by  the 
other.  If  we  now  consider  a  million  crumbs  as  hav- 
ing a  million  pounds  of  speed  between  them,  we  shall 
see  that  their  joint  capital  is  not  lessened  by  a  shil- 
ling here  and  there  being  taken  out  of  the  pocket  of 
one  crumb,  and  put  into  the  pocket  of  another  ; 
whereas  the  joint  capital  is  increased  whenever  two 
crumbs  endow  each  other  with  anything  from  a 
shilling  upwards  to  a  pound.  Moreover  the  addi- 
tion takes  place  very  much  oftener  than  the  ex- 
change, because  it  takes  less  time  for  a  crumb  to 
meet  another  coming  towards  it,  than  to  overtake 
one  going  from  it. 

The  result  of  all  this  is  that,  just  as  real  crumbs 
would  gradually  slow  down  and  stop,  and  put  an 
end  to  the  gas  in  one  way  ;  so  these  ideal  crumbs 
will  gradually  quicken  their  pace  till  they  burst  into 
flame,  and  put  an  end  to  the  gas  in  another  way. 

That  is  the  dilemma,  and  I  will  leave  science  to 
deal  with  it.  In  order  to  be  understood  by  perfect 
elasticians,  I  will  put  it  into  shorthand  : — The  cumu- 
lative effect  of  the  collision  between  kinetic  mole- 
cules must  be  to  equalize  their  average  velocity,  and 
equal  average  velocity  must  tend  to  produce  a  greater 


Chemistry:  The  Man  in  the  Crumb     155 

number  of  collisions  at  points  of  contact  anterior  to 
the  molecular  diameter  which  is  at  right  angles  to 
the  line  of  direction  of  the  molecule,  than  at  points 
posterior  to  that  diameter  ;  so  that  whether  such 
collisions  accelerate  or  diminish  the  velocity  of  the 
molecule,  their  cumulative  result  must  ultimately  be 
fatal  to  the  equilibrium  of  the  gas. 

The  cryptogram,  we  can  now  see,  was  too  faint- 
hearted when  it  said  that  there  was  no  loss  of  Energy 
of  Motion  in  the  encounters  between  the  Going 
Crumbs.  There  is  a  gain  of  Energy  of  Motion  ; 
and  it  Is  of  course  that  gain  that  produces  the 
increasing  fury  of  the  thumps  against  the  wall  of  the 
containing  vessel.  In  this  way  we  have  accounted 
for  Boyle's  Law  much  better  than  the  Kinetic 
Molecular  Theory  accounts  for  it.  Indeed  the  only 
thing  we  have  not  accounted  for  is  the  Kinetic 
Molecule. 


ELEVENTH  HEAD 


THE  CONJURING  TRICK' 

The  Idealist  Lexicon. — i.  The  Conjurer  of  Alexan- 
dria.— 2.  Pure  Assurance. — 3.  The  Child's  Riddle. — . 
4.  The  Enchanted  Castle. — 5.  A  work  of  an  Idealist 
Tendency. 

Tr\ESCARTES  likened  his  search  for  some  one 
"*-^  certain  truth  on  which  to  build,  to  the  demand 
of  Archimedes  for  a  fulcrum  on  which  to  swing  the 
earth.  I  seek  to  tell  what  manner  of  book  is  worth  a 
bag  of  gold,  and  what  I  need  is  one  firm  word  that 
will  not  change  into  some  other  word,  and  slide  and 
glide  away. 

We  have  now  dealt  with  the  Idealism  that  looks 
within,  and  the  Materialism  that  looks  without,  it- 
self. In  both  cases  our  quarrel  was  in  words  ;  but 
whereas  Idealism  was  all  words,  we  quarrelled  with 
it  altogether  ;  and  whereas  Materialism  was  a  mix- 
ture of  facts  and  words,  we  had  no  quarrel  with 
its  facts.  We  distinguished  between  science  and 
sci'cntology. 

Such  differential  treatment  accords  with  the  spirit 
of  the  Will  we  are  construing,  in  which  there  are 
three  bequests  to  science.  If  the  Testator's  idealism 
be  opposed  to  materialism,  it  cannot  be  the  material- 
ism of  the  laboratory,  and  must  be  the  materialism 
of  the  lexicon. 

156 


Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick     157 

Where  does  that  opposition  begin  ? 

The  last  word  of  Materialism  is  not  Matter,  but 
Power.  We  have  seen  that  In  many  ways.  We 
have  seen  the  demon  in  the  falling  stone,  and  the 
man  in  the  going  crumb.  We  have  seen  It  still  more 
clearly  in  the  dissected  atom,  which  proved  to  be  all 
demon,  and  no  crumb.  The  abiding  mystery  in  the 
material  universe  Is  strength.  Strength  is,  not  the 
last  word,  but,  verily  speaking,  the  first  word.  In 
the  scientific  lexicon.  It  is  the  word  which  science 
has  not  explained,  but  by  which  she  explains  all  other 
words. 

What  is  the  first  word  in  the  idealist  lexicon  ? 
What  is  the  word  that  denies  Strength  ? 


>I 


"A  point  is  that  which  hath  no  parts,  and  no 
magnitude." 

With  these  words  began  a  book  which  was  put  into 
my  hands,  of  course  without  the  slightest  warning 
of  what  It  was  about,  when  I  was  twelve  years  old. 
I  need  not  remind  any  one  that,  like  the  Latin 
Grammar,  it  was  a  Mediterranean  book,  written  in 
Mediterranean  words  which  I  only  half  understood. 

The  Romans  did  not  write  the  book,  any  more 
than  they  wrote  the  Latin  Grammar  or  the  Catholic 
Creed.     In    school    they   were    themselves    Babus. 


158  The  New  Word 

Dogma  streamed  on  Europe  for  two  thousand 
years  from  the  great  lighthouse  of  Alexandria. 

The  Greeks  themselves  did  not  write  the  dogma  ; 
their  share  in  it  was  the  editing.  They  were  vikings 
who  ransacked  the  temples  of  buried  cities  and  for- 
gotten realms,  and  brought  forth  the  hoards  of 
knowledge  into  the  marketplace.  They  were  pub- 
lishers, and  Alexandria  was  their  chief  publishing 
house,  Euclid  himself  was  no  famous  geometrician, 
but  an  immortal  editor.  This  book  of  his  is  like  a 
hard,  bright  crystal  imbedded  in  the  human  brain. 

To  me  it  came  as  literature,  and  I  can  still  recall 
the  pleasure  with  which  I  read  the  opening  pages. 
I  thought  the  ancient  Alexandrian  the  ablest  writer 
I  had  ever  met  with,  the  one  who  knew  most  surely 
what  he  wanted  to  say,  and  said  it  in  the  surest 
words.  Those  axioms,  I  remember,  struck  me  as 
marvels  of  verihood  ;  I  was  not  awake  to  see  that 
they  had  told  me  nothing  but  that  more  is  more 
than  less,  and  less  is  less  than  more. 

I  read  on  till  I  came  to  the  place  where  the  old 
conjurer,  in  order  to  show  that  two  three-cornered 
figures  are  a  pair,  makes-believe  to  pick  up  one  and 
set  It  down  upon  the  other.  When  I  saw  that  slice 
of  pure  flatness  rise  through  the  air  before  my  eyes, 
as  though  it  were  an  aeroplane,  and  settle  down  upon 
another  slice,  my  mind,  young  as  it  was,  boggled 
at  the  sight.  The  African  wizard  with  his  magic 
spell  had  cast  me  into  a  dream,  and  In  my  dream 
he  had  taken  me  by  the  sleeve  and  led  me  Into  a 


Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick     159 

flat  world,  a  world  In  which  there  was  neither  height 
nor  depth,  neither  up  nor  down,  neither  top  nor 
bottom;  and  now,  hey  presto!  he  had  jerked  me 
out  of  the  flat  world  back  Into  the  real  world  In 
which  thin  pieces  of  paper  can  be  picked  up  and  set 
down  on  the  top  of  other  pieces.  I  was  surprised 
in  the  same  way  as  Alice  when  she  saw  the  cat  in 
Wonderland  go  away  and  leav^e  its  grin  behind. — 
How  long  have  we  all  dwelt  In  Wonderland,  and 
watched  other  Mediterranean  wizards  working  their 
famous  spell  that  changes  the  cat  without  changing 
the  grin  ? 

And  now  I  have  to  see  whether  this  hard,  bright 
crystal  can  be  a  fulcrum  for  the  mind  ;  If  In  the 
lexicon  of  Pure  Earth-Measure  there  Is  any  word  by 
which  I  can  measure  the  Testator's  word.  Was  not 
"exact"  one  of  the  explanations  of  "Idealist?" 


II 

The  word  Mathematics  seems  to  mean  assurance, 
or  making  sure  ;  and  that  being  so  we  can  understand 
why  Bacon  called  it  the  handmaid  of  the  sciences, 
and  why  Descartes  wanted  to  make  It  the  maid-of- 
all-work. 

The  race  of  men  before  the  Stone-cutters  made 
sure  of  things  by  smelling  them,  a  habit  that  still 
breathes  in  our  word  know.  It  was  not  till  men  got 
knives  that  they  could  cut  things  open,  and  change 


i6o  The  New  Word 

knowledge  into  science.  In  doing  so,  as  well  as  in 
whole  groups  of  words,  they  showed  their  growing 
trust  in  the  eye.  This  turning  towards  the  light  has 
its  bodily  counterpart  in  the  great  brain-growth  to- 
wards the  eyeballs,  a  growth  wrought  partly  by  the 
chemic  power  of  light  and  thus  a  real  bridge  be- 
tween chemistry  and  wakefulness;  a  growth  which 
has  helped  to  shape  the  human  skull,  and  so  made 
man  a  child  of  light. 

But  the  eye  only  sees  in  two  measurements  ;  it  can 
see  length  and  breadth,  but  thickness  It  cannot  see. 
The  sense  of  sight  is  but  a  daughter  of  the  sense 
of  touch  ;  the  eye  a  magic  finger  reaching  forth  into 
the  abyss.  Again,  there  are  two  sides  to  making 
sure,  and  one  of  them  Is  the  thing  that  you  make  sure 
of.  Sights  come  and  go  ;  the  sun  himself  is  a  mere 
season-ticket-holder  of  the  sky  ;  your  moon  changes 
like  a  woman's  temper  ;  that  big  blue  cave  of  stars 
is  not  half  so  steady  as  one's  own  cave.  Only  the 
firm  earth  beneath  your  feet  is  fixed.  You  measure 
that,  you  go  by  steps,  and  you  know  where  you  are. 
It  did  not  need  the  overflowing  of  the  Nile,  nor  the 
Egyptian  Delta,  to  make  Geometry  the  mother  of 
mathematics. 

Already,  when  the  first  land  surveyor  measured 
the  length  of  the  ground  by  the  length  of  his  foot 
or  stride,  he  showed  himself  more  sure  of  one  length 
than  the  other.  But  lo  !  another  man  has  stepped 
the  same  length  of  ground,  and  made  it  longer. 
One  foot  is  not  the  same  as  another  foot.     It  is  time 


Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick    i6i 

to  measure  what  you  measured  by,  and  make  assur- 
ance doubly  sure. 

In  the  end  some  unknown  Andronlkos  arose,  and 
said, — Let  us  forget  there  was  ever  real  ground,  or 
a  real  foot,  or  a  real  pair  of  human,  or  of  compass, 
legs,  and  make  believe  that  we  are  measuring  Pure 
Ground  with  Pure  Measures.  And  he  called  his 
science,  or  his  language,  Pure  Assurance. 

Now  here  is  Idealism  in  its  nakedness.  I  do  not 
mean  that  it  is  the  idealism  of  our  Testator.  I  do 
not  claim  this  bequest  for  works  of  a  mathematical 
tendency.  But  as  it  was  in  the  mind  of  Plato,  so 
this  is  in  the  general  mind,  the  embryo  of  Idealism, 
and  therefore  it  cannot  be  passed  by. 


Ill 


The  first  word  in  Euclid's  definition  is  point.  He 
makes-believe  to  begin  with  that.  But  he  can  only 
tell  me  what  a  point  is  by  telling  me  what  it  is  not. 
Every  definition  is  a  not.  An  outline  can  only  be 
gained  in  battle.  The  simplest  definition  follows 
the  yea  and  nay  of  electricity,  as  in  the  case  of 
truth  and  verihood. 

Accordingly  Euclid  tells  me  that  his  point  has  no 
size.  And  in  doing  so  he  shows  that  he  expects  to 
find  size  in  my  mind  already — that  I  know  all  about 
size.  And  thus  in  the  order  of  the  thoughts  size 
comes  before  the  point.     In  the  language  of  Pure 


1 62  The  New  Word 

Assurance,  Euclid  has  assumed  the  three  dimensions 
of  space  In  telling  me  that  his  point  has  none. 
Which,  as  he  would  say  himself.  Is  absurd. — There 
Is  a  good  deal  of  absurdity  in  Euclid. 

His  aim  Is  to  make-believe  that  he  Is  starting  with 
the  point.  And  so  Instead  of  working  down  to  it 
fairly,  he  pretends  to  create  it.  It  Is  another  con- 
juring trick.  The  juggler  claps  down  his  magical 
dice-box  over  size,  and  when  he  lifts  It  up,  hey 
presto!  size  has  vanished,  and  the  point  Is  there 
Instead.  In  a  school-book  that  Is  unfair.  The  ab- 
straction ought  to  be  abstracted  before  the  school- 
boy's eyes,  and  not  popped  on  him  from  up  the 
conjuror's  sleeve,  as  If  it  were  some  real  thing  made 
of  Imponderable  Matter.  Which,  to  translate 
Euclid,  Is  unheard  of. 

I  have  to  fall  back  on  my  humble  method  of  ask- 
ing what  the  words  mean.  I  cannot  find  that  point 
means  anything  more  than  end,  one  end  of  a  line, 
and  so  I  must  at  least  know  what  a  line  Is.  But  line. 
In  Its  turn,  only  means  edge,  the  edge  of  a  face  ; 
and  face  Is  only  side,  the  side  of  a  block.  Thus 
the  words  themselves  lead  me  back  into  the  world 
of  size,  a  world  of  three  measurements,  the  real 
world  In  which  I  am  accustomed  to  live.  I  can  now, 
If  I  am  asked  to  do  so,  make-believe  to  forget  the 
block  and  think  only  of  the  side  ;  to  forget  that  and 
think  only  of  the  edge  ;  to  forget  that  and  think 
only  of  the  end, — as  I  can  to  forget  the  end  and 
think  of  nothing.     And  It  Is  by  such  steps  that  this 


Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick     163 

venerable  quack  ought  to  have  brought  his  flats  and 
lines  and  points  before  my  mind's  eye,  when  I  was 
twelve  years  old. 

We  have  not  Euclid's  handwriting  before  us,  and 
we  know  that  Mediterranean  copyists  sometimes  take 
freedoms  with  their  text.  One  of  Euclid's  copyists 
seems  to  have  felt  that  there  was  something  false 
about  the  point,  and  he  has  tried  to  mend  matters 
by  saying  that  a  point  is  that  which  has  position. 
I  am  reminded  rather  painfully  of  a  certain  Energy 
of  Position  which  gave  us  some  trouble  a  short  way 
back.  To  say  that  a  point  has  position  is  to  say 
that  it  is  fixed  ;  and  you  cannot  fix  a  point  without 
having  at  least  one  other  point  to  fix  it  by  :  and 
as  soon  as  you  have  got  two  points  side  by  side  you 
have  got  a  line.  And  so  we  work  back  by  another 
road  to  the  real  starting-point,  the  point  from  which 
the  science  of  fanciful  Earth-Measure  did  indeed 
start,  namely  the  solid  earth. 

Euclid  has  put  the  cart  before  the  horse.  Which 
Is  unheard  of. 

I  am  not  ashamed  to  say  that  I  have  found  more 
sense  in  a  child's  riddle  than  in  all  Euclid's  defini- 
tions— though  they  are  also  in  their  way  a  child's 
riddle.  It  runs, — How  many  sides  has  a  round 
plum-pudding  ?  And  the  answer  is — two,  an  out- 
side and  an  inside. 

Because  the  science  of  Earth-Measure  is  the  science 
of  measuring  shapes,  and  the  child's  plum-pudding 
is  the  truth  about  shape.     It  is  the  shape  of  the 


1 64  The  New  Word 

All-Thing  as  well  as  of  the  atom.  It  is,  if  I  must 
wield  these  enchanted  weapons,  the  shape  of  space 
itself — the  mind-shape.  The  child's  plum-pudding 
brings  before  us  the  unreality  of  all  the  flats  that 
EucHd  deals  in,  showing  us  that  there  is  no  half- 
way house  between  nothing  and  the  whole  ball.  T 
am  reminded  of  another  famous  dogma  in  which 
the  thundering  adjectives  roll  to  and  fro,  from  One 
to  Three,  and  back  from  Three  to  One.  All  un- 
awares, perhaps,  the  mind  that  gave  birth  to  that 
mighty  inspiration  was  reasoning  from  One  Space 
in  Three  Measures  to  One  God  in  Three  Persons. 
If  it  be  not  the  creed  of  Athanasius  it  is  the  creed  of 
Alexandria. 

Perhaps  the  minds  for  whom  the  word  One  is  the 
truest  word  in  speech,  whether  they  write  it  Mono- 
theism or  Monism,  are  shallower  than  they  think 
they  are. 

IV 

Those  flats  of  Euclid's  are  eye  shapes,  and  their 
power  over  the  mind  is  owing,  not  wholly  to  the 
early  man's  belief  in  a  flat  earth,  but  in  some  measure 
to  that  enlargement  of  the  eye  nerves  which  makes 
our  brain,  as  it  were,  lopsided.  We  like  to  think  in 
flats  ;  our  explanation  is  a  map.  And  since  the 
world  is  round,  the  map  is  false,  and  what  we  gain 
in  clearness  we  lose  in  verihood. 

Here  we  are  at  the  heart  of  this  two-thousand- 
year-old  falsehood,  these  lengths  without  breadths, 


Mathematics:  The  Conjuring  Trick     165 

these  flats  without  thickness,  this  whole  denial,  not 
merely  of  strength,  but  of  reality.  The  science  of 
Pure  Earthmeasure  is  the  science  of  Tidy  Shapes. 
Whereas  we  know  that  real  shapes  are  always  ever 
so  little  untidy  ;  the  ball  is  not  quite  round,  the  face 
is  not  quite  flat,  the  line  is  not  quite  straight,  the 
point  is  not  so  fine  as  nothing,  and  it  is  not  quite 
fixed.  As  soon  as  Pure  Assurance  undertakes  to 
assure  us  of  anything  beyond  its  own  purity,  lo  ! 
the  triangle  is  no  longer  equilateral,  and  the  parallel 
lines  run  together,  and  we  have  to  fall  back  upon 
the  landsurveyor's  chain,  and  use  compasses  of  wood 
and  brass.  Alas  !  is  even  the  purity  of  Pure  As- 
surance free  from  scandal  ?  Do  we  not  hear  of 
negligible  quantities  being  brushed  aside,  as  Pure 
Physics  brushes  its  scandals  into  the  Ether  ?  Is  not 
the  enchanted  castle  of  Pure  Earthmeasure  haunted 
by  a  restless  spirit  that  even  the  wizards  cannot  exor- 
cise, a  ghostly  circle  that  will  not  be  squared  ? 


The  study  of  Unreal  measure  has  been  called  for 
ages  a  training  for  the  mind  ;  as  though  the  mind 
were  some  poor  sickly  plant  that  could  not  grow 
upwards  unless  it  were  nailed  to  a  dead  stick.  The 
healthy  plant  grows  upward  in  search  of  light,  be- 
cause the  light  draws  it  upward,  and  because  it  needs 
and  feeds  on  light.  Pity  for  those  that  cannot  bear 
the  light,  that  creep  and  cling  to  their  dead  stick, 


1 66  The  New  Word 

and  put  forth  their  puny  blossoms  in  the  shade. 
Yet  greater  pity  for  those  that  pine  and  are  denied 
the  light,  that  climb  and  are  forbidden,  that  bud 
and  may  not  flower, — for  the  sound  crucified  to  save 
the  sick. 

For  my  part,  when  I  stand  outside  the  Roman 
forcing-house,  and  see  the  gardeners  inside  training 
the  plants  entrusted  to  their  care  ;  driving  their 
nails,  and  turning  on  their  Alexandrian  gas-jets,  and 
shutting  out  the  day,  I  watch  them  with  other 
feelings  than  reverence.  I  see  the  tired  heads  droop 
in  the  foul  air  ;  and  I  want  to  break  open  the 
door  of  the  forcing-house,  and  draw  forth  the  nails, 
and  turn  out.  the  gas-jets,  and  let  In  the  light  of 
heaven. 

Once  when  I  was  in  Delft  I  visited  the  house 
where  William  the  Silent  was  murdered  by  order  of 
the  Catholic  King.  And  looking  out  of  a  window 
into  the  courtyard  I  saw  some  flowers  in  pots  stand- 
ing in  a  corner  over  which  the  shadow  of  the  wall 
had  crept.  And  while  I  looked  a  girl  came  out  into 
the  courtyard,  and  took  up  the  flowers,  one  after 
the  other,  and  moved  them  out  of  the  shadow  into 
the  sunshine  again.  Then  I  said  to  myself, — La  I 
here  I  have  seen  the  work  of  William  the  Silent  :  he 
saw  the  black  shadow  of  Spain  creep  over  his  coun- 
try, and  he  brought  his  countrymen  out  into  the 
light  of  freedom  again. 

To  me,  while  I  looked,  this  also  seemed  to  be  a 
work  of  an  idealist  tendency. 


TWELFTH    HEAD 


THE  CIPHER 

The  Bottom  of  the  Mind. — i.  Pure  Reason, — 2.  Burla 
Burla. — 3.  Perfect  Certainty^ — 4.  The  Leak. — 5.  The 
Child's  Prayer. 

pURE  Earthmeasure,  instead  of  affording  a 
true  starting  point,  has  turned  out  to  be  a  mere 
balloon  arising  from  the  real  earth.  But  there 
is  another  kind  of  measure  which  seems  to  come 
before  earthmeasure,  more  truly  than  Euclid's 
point  before  his  lines  and  flats.  If  measure  be  the 
handmaid  of  knowledge,  number  is  the  hand- 
maid of  measure.  Here,  surely,  we  touch  bot- 
tom; if  not  the  bottom  of  the  All-Thing,  at  least 
the  bottom  of  the  mind,  so  often  mistaken  for  the 
bottom  of  the  All-Thing.  Did  not  Pythagoras  strive 
to  build  the  All-Thing  out  of  numbers  ?  And  did 
not  the  chief  architect  of  the  Roman  school,  Boe- 
thius,  choose  ciphering  for  his  foundation  stone;  for 
the  first  tread  of  that  curriculum  which  the  im- 
prisoned squirrels  turned  round  so  painfully  In  the 
Logical  Age  ? 

I 

Because  I  shrank  from  using  the  Babu  word  Arith- 
metic, I  cast  about  for  the  child's  name  for  the  same 
thing  :  and  no  sooner  had  I  written  It  down  than  I 

167 


1 68  The  New  Word 

saw  it  foretold  what  I  was  going  to  say.  For  among 
us  the  word  cipher  has  come  to  mean  the  figure  o  ; 
and  children  tell  each  other  that  nought  stands  for 
nothing. 

Arithmetic  is  Pure  Reasoning,  as  the  children 
would  have  told  Kant,  if  he  had  stooped  to  ask  them. 
When  they  are  going  to  rob  a  bird's  nest,  they  ex- 
cuse themselves  by  saying  that,  if  they  leave  one  egg 
in  the  nest,  the  bird  will  not  know  it  has  been 
robbed,  because  birds  cannot  count.  At  heart  they 
know  very  well  that  the  bird  is  not  so  stupid  as  that  ; 
but  they  have  learned  from  grown-up  people  that 
you  can  lull  your  sense  of  right  and  wrong  to  sleep 
with  words  ;  and  the  grown-up  people  have  told 
them  that  birds  have  instinct  instead  of  reason.  And 
so  they  have  gone  to  the  point,  and  put  it  plainly 
that  birds  cannot  count.     Which  is  absurd. 

The  greatest  Pure  Reasoner  ever  known  was  not 
Kant,  but  Babbage's  machine.  The  Calculating 
Machine,  as  its  creator  named  it,  not  only  reckoned 
more  carefully  than  Babbage  himself,  but  when  it 
reached  a  stage  at  which  new  laws  of  number  came 
into  play,  laws  which  had  been  unknown  to  Babbage 
when  he  made  it,  it  discovered  those  laws  for  itself, 
and  went  right  on.  That  is  to  say,  it  was  infalli- 
ble. 

If  it  be  the  peculiar  distinction  and  glory  of  man 
that  he  is  the  reckoning  animal,  one  sees  that  Bab- 
bage did  a  far  more  wonderful  thing  than  was 
thought  of  by  the  learned  men  who  hoped  that  they 


Logic:  The  Cipher  169 

could  create  life  out  of  the  contents  of  a  chemist's 
shop.  Because  all  they  hoped  to  create  was  the 
lowest  kind  of  life  ;  in  their  own  words,  the  pro- 
tozoon,  or  forellfe  ;  whereas  Babbage  created  the 
highest  kind  of  life  ;  as  it  should  seem,  the  afterlife, 
— ta  meta  ta  phiisika  in  very  deed ! 

In  many  ages  and  countries  Babbage's  machine 
would  have  been  worshipped  as  a  god.  In  the  age 
from  which  we  are  escaping  it  would  have  been 
burnt  for  witchcraft.  And  yet  all  the  time  this 
reasoning  creature  could  not  have  told  its  creator 
how  many  buttons  he  had  on  his  waistcoat.  It 
was  much  stupider  than  the  birds,  really.  It  could 
only  go  on  saying  what  Babbage  told  it  to  say.  It 
had  no  going  strength  ;  no  soul. 

It  would  be  easy  to  make  a  more  energetic  ma- 
chine than  Babbage's,  out  of  a  millwheel  and  a  roll 
of  paper,  which  would  go  on  multiplying  by  ten,  by 
the  simple  process  of  stamping  noughts  on  the 
paper,  as  long  as  the  paper  lasted  and  the  stream 
ran.  Indeed,  the  Buddhists  long  ago  took  a  far 
higher  flight  than  B'abbage,  with  their  famous  pray- 
ing-wheel, which  says  a  prayer  every  time  the  wheel 
turns  round,  and  so  may  fairly  lay  claim  to  being 
Pure  Religion. 


II 


Here  then  is  the  ogre  at  last,  in  his  true  shape. 
Pure  Ciphering  is  the  last  word,  or,  verily  speak- 


170  The  New  Word 

Ing,  the  first  word,  in  the  Andronican  lexicon.  If 
there  be  such  a  thing  as  metaphysics,  ciphering  is 
Pure  Metaphysics.  It  is  the  science  of  Absolute 
Truth,  of  Verlhood  By  Itself. 

I  cannot  show  this  better  than  by  means  of  a 
saying  which  has  always  been  revered  as  a  sample 
of  Absolute  Truth,  a  foundation-stone  of  Logic,  a 
genuine  fulcrum  for  the  human  mind.  It  is  put 
forward  as  such  by  Descartes,  and  it  is  still  popular 
in  quarters  where  Descartes  has  always  been  un- 
popular— Two  and  two  are  four. 

It  is  hard  for  one  whose  mind  is  childlike,  and  all 
untrained  in  exact  reasoning,  to  take  this  aged  play 
upon  words  quite  seriously.  Nevertheless,  in  case 
there  should  be  still  some  sleep-walkers  abroad,  not 
able  to  withstandthiskindof  conjuring,  I  have  taken 
the  trouble  to  ask  myself  a  question, — Suppose  there 
should  be  savages  who  had  got  distinct  names  only 
for  two  or  three  numbers,  and  whose  name  for  four 
was  consequently  "two  and  two",  would  not  this 
unanswerable  proposition  then  stand  thus, — Two 
and  two  are  two  and  two  ?  I  made  the  practical 
experiment  ;  I  went  to  a  book  about  savages,  and 
sure  enough  I  found  that  among  the  Queensland 
black-fellows  the  name  for  two  is  hurla,  and  the 
name  for  four  is  hiirla  burla. 

And  so  now,  copying  the  pleasant  vein  of  a  dis- 
tinguished Mediterranean  cardinal,  I  am  able  to  pic- 
ture a  Queensland  Champion  of  Positivism  calling  his 
dusky  congregation  round  him,  and  addressing  them 


Logic:  The  Cipher  171 

in  this  wise  :  "  My  brethren,  I  grieve  to  hear  that 
some  among  us  have  denied  that  the  Kangaroo  In 
the  Moon  ought  rightly  to  be  called  a  Kangaroo. 
And  I  find  that  they  have  fallen  Into  this  distressing 
heresy  through  doubting  if  there  be  such  a  thing 
as  Absolute  Truth  known  to  men.  Let  me  there- 
fore, while  the  secular  arm  is  making  ready  the 
fagots,  silence  these  unhappy  Infidels;  and  con- 
firm the  wavering  faith  of  such  as  still  wish  to  be- 
lieve ;  by  reminding  them  and  you  of  this  unalter- 
able, this  irrefragable,  this  Untied  Truth  By  Itself, 
— Burla  and  burla,  at  all  times  and  In  all  places,  and 
to  all  men  and  kangaroos,  are  burla  Burla  1 " 

That  little  fable  may  help  us  to  understand  the 
difference  between  the  kind  of  Absolute  Truth  which 
was  known  even  to  Babbage's  machine,  and  the  kind 
of  Absolute  Truth  which  has  to  fall  back  on  fagots 
for  Absolute  Proof. 


Ill 


There  is  a  very  famous  art  or  mystery  of  ciphering 
in  words  which  has  been  known  for  more  than  two 
thousand  years  as  Logic. 

Very  many  treatises  have  been,  and  are  still  being, 
written  on  this  art,  but  when  we  look  Into  them  we 
find  that  no  two  of  them  are  agreed  as  to  what  Logic 
is,  or  what  It  does,  or  how  It  ought  to  do  It.  The 
learned  and  distinguished  writers  have  fared  no  bet- 


172  The  New  Word 

ter  than  the  members  of  the  Metaphysical  Society. 
And  I  am  afraid  the  reason  is  the  same  in  both  cases. 
They  have  not  asked  what  the  word  itself  meant. 

Logic  sounds  hke  the  Babu  for  wordiness.  But 
it  also  means  orderliness.  It  is  connected  with  law, 
much  as  arithmetic  is  connected  with  rhythm. 
Now  the  history  of  logic  is  the  history  of  an  at- 
tempt to  make  an  arithmetic  of  words. 

The  aim  of  the  logicians  has  been  to  learn  from 
words  instead  of  things.  They  have  sought  for 
what  they  call  certainty,  or  Perfect  Certainty,  which 
is  of  course  our  old  friend  Absolute  Truth  or  Pure 
Assurance  under  another  name.  And  they  have 
believed  that  they  could  arrive  at  it  by  the  tidy 
arrangement  of  words. 

Their  grand  achievement  has  been  the  syllogism, 
which  is,  as  its  name  half  confesses,  a  mere  saying 
again.  To  use  their  own  language,  every  logical 
proposition  is  an  identical  proposition.  The  reason- 
ing machine  can  only  say  what  its  creator  tells  it 
to  say.  You  cannot  get  more  out  of  the  words  than 
you  have  put  into  them  ;  as  the  logicians  themselves 
confess  altogether  when  they  say  that  the  conclusion 
must  be  contained  in  the  premises.  And  the  more 
tidily  the  premises  are  arranged,  the  more  self-evident 
the  conclusion  will  be,  till  Pure  Logic  attains  to  Per- 
fect Certainty  in — Burla  burla. 

In  the  old  conjuring  books  one  meets  this  kind  of 
thing  as  a  specimen  of  what  the  logical  mind  believes 
to  be  proof  : — 


Logic:  The  Cipher  173 

All  men  are  mortal  : 

Socrates  Is  a  man  : 

Therefore  Socrates  is  mortal. 

Now  that  Is  quite  true.  But  It  Is  not  a  proof  of 
anything  ;  it  Is  merely  a  vain  repetition.  If  all  men 
are  sure  to  die,  then  in  saying  that  Socrates  is  a 
man  you  have  said  that  he  is  sure  to  die.  If  not, 
the  syllogism  would  stand  thus — - 

All  who  are  not  sure  to  die  are  sure  to  die  : 

Socrates  Is  one  who  is  not  sure  to  die  : 

Therefore  Socrates  Is  sure  to  die. 

Which  Is  absurd. 

There  is  no  such  thing  as  logical  proof.  Demon- 
stration is  not  proof,  it  Is  pointing  out,  and  pure 
reason  Is  the  pointing  out  of  pure  samenesses,  like 
those  of  arithmetic  and  measure.  Logic  does  this  in 
words,  and  the  better  it  does  it,  the  more  the  words 
themselves  will  be  the  same,  till  they  end  by  saying 
nothing  at  all. 

As  soon  as  we  pass  from  words  to  things,  we  find 
that  we  are  dealing  not  with  samenesses  but  with 
likenesses.  The  art  of  pointing  them  out  in  words 
is  called  by  the  logicians  rhetoric  ;  and  perhaps  the 
greatest  triumph  of  rhetoric  has  been  in  persuading 
mankind  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  logic.  But  all 
the  time  the  surest  demonstration  is  that  which  points 
out  the  thing  itself  ;  and,  if  we  fnay  believe  the 
greatest  of  all  rhetoricians,  the  surest  rhetoric  is  that 
which  moves  the  man  himself  by  other  means  than 
words. 


174  The  New  Word 

For  all  this  time  there  has  to  be  a  man. 

It  is  because  Demosthenes  declared  the  secret  of 
oratory  to  be  the  orator's  thump  upon  the  table, 
that  I  believe  this  bag  of  gold  thrown  down  among 
the  logicians  will  explode  all  their  syllogisms,  and 
that,  a  stronger  than  I  having  thumped  the  table,  I 
am  adding  these  few  words. 


IV 

My  slight  acquaintance  with  treatises  on  logic 
leads  me  to  the  conclusion  that  the  art  was  invented 
by  some  one  living  among  savages  whose  minds  were 
incapable  of  distinguishing  between  puns  and  sense. 
The  writers  are  all  hard  at  work  refuting  the  nursery 
riddle — When  is  a  door  not  a  door  ?  When  it  is 
ajar.  That  riddle,  I  think,  like  other  things  one 
hears  in  the  nursery,  must  be  a  relic,  what  Darwin 
calls  a  rudiment,  of  old  cannibal  metaphysics.  It  is 
the  kind  of  thing  that  would  have  made  the  fortune 
of  a  Greek  sophist,  or  a  Roman  theologian,  or  a 
modern  physicist.  When  is  The  Good  not  Good  ? 
When  it  is  an  abstract  noun.  When  is  bread  not 
bread  ?  When  it  is  a  grin.  When  is  elastic  not 
elastic  ?     When   it   is   a   scientific   conception. 

In  so  far  as  the  tidy  arrangement  of  words  helps 
us  to  tell  sense  from  nonsense,  logic  is  a  useful  part 
of  grammar.  If  it  pretended  to  be  nothing  more,  I 
should  not  have  found  it  in  my  path  in  this  inquiry. 
The  brazen  serpent  made  by  Moses  in  the  wilder- 


Logic:  The  Cipher  175 

ness,  (in  seeming  carelessness  of  his  Command- 
ments) was  very  well  as  a  cure  for  snake-bites.  But 
when  the  people  were  found  burning  incense  to  it  in 
the  house  of  Yahweh,  it  was  time  to  call  it  not  Snake 
but  Brass,  and  to  break  it  in  pieces.  (Hebraists 
seem  to  have  missed  the  play  upon  words  in 
rachash  and  rehustan.) 

Logic  is  such  a  medicine,  and  the  people  are  burn- 
ing incense  to  it  in  the  house  of  Verihood.  They 
are  mistaking  samenesses  in  words  for  samenesses  in 
things.  The  mistake  is  made  in  theology,  it  is  made 
in  morality,  it  is  made  by  the  lawyers,  It  is  made 
by  the  scientists. 

Logic  is  like  a  straight  line  which  can  only  touch 
the  round  of  verihood  at  one  point.  The  farther 
you  prolong  the  line,  the  farther  you  are  going  from 
verihood.  The  definitions  break  down  ;  the  efforts 
to  enclose  reality  in  words  run  into  endless  decimals. 
There  is  a  perpetual  flaw  which  cannot  be  patched 
up.  There  is  a  leak  which  cannot  be  stopped.  The 
lawyers  cannot  stop  the  leak  with  all  their  codes 
and  cases  ;  nor  the  theologians  with  all  their  General 
Councils  and  their  Privy  Councils  ;  nor  the  moral- 
ists with  all  their  altruism  ;  nor  the  materialists  with 
all  their  Ether  and  Ethereon,  their  necessary  assump- 
tions and  their  scientific  conceptions.  That  is  the 
answer  to  the  spell  of  the  enchanters  ;  when  men 
have  taken  to  heart  that  lesson  the  enchantment  will 
be  broken,  and  the  Mediterranean  nightmare  will 
vex  sleep  no  more. 


176  The  New  Word 

The  more  Logic  is  asked  to  do,  the  worse  it  does 
it.  Pure  Reckoning  is  seen  at  its  best  in  the  Multi- 
plication Table.  It  is  seen  at  its  worst  in  such  a 
would-be  science  as  Political  Economy.  There  are 
two  schools  of  this  science,  known  respectively  as 
Individualists  and  Socialists.  Their  conclusions  are 
diametrically  opposed  ;  both  are  thoroughly  logical, 
and  both  are  thoroughly  wrong.  Both  take  it  for 
granted  that  men  are  right-angled  triangles  ;  and  set- 
ting out  in  opposite  directions  from  this  common 
ground,  both  end  in  absurdity.  One  holds  that  men 
are  perfectly  selfish,  and  the  other  that  they  are 
perfectly  unselfish  ;  but  both  are  agreed  that  men  are 
perfectly  wise.  A  world  of  men  who  were  all 
ruled  by  enlightened  selfishness  would  be  a  heaven, 
more  so,  perhaps,  than  a  world  of  men  ruled  by 
enlightened  unselfishness.  Unhappily  the  case  is 
that  most  men  are  intensely  stupid.  Some  of  them 
may  be  more  selfish,  and  others  more  unselfish,  but 
stupidity  is  master  of  them  all,  and  master  of  the 
world. 

V 

Is  there,  then,  nothing  to  be  done  ?  Surely  there 
is. 

Once  when  I  was  seated  in  one  of  our  public 
pleasure-grounds  a  little  fellow,  whose  hoop  had  got 
bent  out  of  shape,  ran  up  to  me  and  asked, — 
"  Please,  sir,  will  you  make  my  hoop  round  ?  "     I 


Logic:  The  Cipher  177 

could  not  forbear  from  smiling  at  the  thought  that 
I  was  being  asked  to  do  that  which  God  has  not  yet 
done.  But  I  did  not  tell  the  little  fellow  that  what 
he  wanted  was  beyond  the  power  of  logic,  or  mathe- 
matics, or  physics  or  metaphysics.  Instead,  I  set  to 
work,  and  made  his  hoop  round;  that  is  to  say,  I 
made  it  round  enough  for  him  to  play  with,  which 
was  all  he  wanted. 

The  prayer  of  that  little  fellow  is  still  sounding  in 
my  ears.  I  think  it  has  been  sounding  in  them  all 
my  life.  I  hear  it  coming  from  many  quarters,  and 
in  many  languages.  I  hear  it  in  the  Fourth  Clause 
of  Nobel's  Will 


THIRTEENTH    HEAD 


THE  END 

Course  of  the  Inquiry. — i.  The  Common  Term. — 
2.  ^  'Magical  Spark. — 3.  The  Atom  of  Thought. — 
4.     The  Swirl. — 5.     The  Name. 

nr^HE  course  taken  by  this  inquiry  is  not  without 
significance. 

At  the  outset  it  seemed  to  be  going  round  and 
round,  without  drawing  nearer  to  the  sought-for  end. 
It  has  since  steadied  into  the  form  of  a  whirlpool, 
drawing  me  down  in  ever  narrowing  rings  until  at 
last  the  whirl-point  is  in  sight  ;  and  we  may  foresee 
that  it  will  turn  out  to  be  a  starting-point,  so  that 
as  soon  as  I  have  passed  through  it  I  shall  begin  to 
come  up  again  on  the  other  side. 

Setting  out  to  discover  what  books  were,  in  the 
opinion  of  no  mean  judge,  most  beneficial  to  man- 
kind, we  found  them  described  by  the  word  Idealist. 
We  had  not  the  endless  task  of  finding  what  that 
word  meant  by  itself  ;  we  had  to  find  what  the 
Testator  meant  by  it. 

We  found  in  the  first  place,  that  it  was  a  new 
word,  not  yet  admitted  to  the  Book  of  Words,  and 
thus  there  was  no  distinct  class  of  books,  to  which 
it  had  already  by  common  usage  been  applied. 

We  found  next  that  it  was  a  half  outlandish  word, 
whose  birth  and  history  were  not  enough  to  guide 

178 


Ontology:  The  End  179 

us  as  to  its  meaning.  We  found  again  that  this 
would  not  have  mattered  if  it  had  named  a  thing 
already  there,  but  that  it  mattered  very  much  when 
we  had  got  to  find  a  thing  to  fit  the  name. 

We  found  next  that  the  Testator's  word  was  being 
used  in  many  meanings  which  seemed  to  have  little 
in  common  with  one  another.  We  examined  some 
of  them,  and  found  they  were  not  in  harmony  with 
the  context  of  the  Will. 

At  length  we  settled  upon  what  seemed  to  be  the 
common  element,  or  beginning,  of  all  these  mean- 
ings. We  polarised  the  word  Idealist  by  means  of 
the  word  Materialist. 

We  found  there  was  a  class  of  books  to  which  the 
word  Materialist  had  been  applied  by  common 
usage,  and  we  examined  them.  As  a  result  this  word 
was  melted  down  to  the  word  Strength. 

We  sought  to  polarise  the  word  Strength,  and  we 
were  thrown  back  upon  words  of  a  kind  which  we 
had  looked  into  already,  and  found  not  in  accord 
with  the  Testator's  general  mind.  This  time  I  bade 
them  take  their  true  shape,  and  they  appeared  as 
ciphers. 

Nothing  is  made  up  of  Ciphers,  and  Everything 
is  made  up  o£  Strength. 


The  opposite  to  strength  is  strength. 

It  is  not  lack  of  strength, — weakness  is  only  the 


i8o  The  New  Word 

slack  tide  of  strength.  It  is  not  no  strength, — 
nothingness  has  neither  position  nor  opposition.  It 
is  strength  going  the  other  way,  as  in  the  yea  and 
nay  of  the  electric  atom,  as  in  the  force  and  energy 
of  the  mechanical  universe,  the  Ebb  and  Flow  of 
Everything. 

The  word  Power,  like  so  many  words  used  by  ma- 
terialists, is  a  bad  one.  Because  Power  means  the 
same  as  Potency,  and  strength  is  not  potential,  but 
kinetic.  All  force  is  pulling.  All  energy  is  pushing. 
All  strength  is  Going  Strength.  As  we  have  seen, 
the  tying  up  of  strength  is  Matter. 

And  as  we  have  seen  again,  Matter  is  wrought  by 
the  crossing  of  two  Ways  of  Strength.  It  is  not  the 
Rest,  but  the  full  Strain  of  the  wrestlers — the  dead- 
lock of  those  great  Twin  Wrestlers  whose  wrestle 
is  the  All-Thing. 

Opposite  is  also  a  bad  word,  because  it  makes  us 
think  in  one  measure,  and  we  ought  to  think  in 
three.  The  right  word  is  inversion,  which  is  to  say, 
in  English,  turning  inside  out. 

The  turning  inside  out  of  strength  is  the  key  to 
the  riddle.  It  will  be  found  the  key  to  many  other 
riddles.  For  rightly  to  interpret  one  word  is  rightly 
to  interpret  all  words. 

The  word  Strength,  which  thus  meets  us  at  the  end 
of  the  enchanted  wood,  has  been  with  us  all  the  way 
in  many  different  disguises.  The  Testator  uses  it 
when  he  asks  for  works  that  shall  have  a  tendency. 
I  have  used  it  whenever  I  have  spoken  of  the  mean- 


Ontology:  The  End  i8i 

ing,  that  is  to  say  the  strength,  of  a  word.  Doctor 
Latham  used  It  in  his  explanation  of  Idealism.  The 
Ideas  of  Plato  were  imperfect  because  he  forgot  to 
use  It.  The  House  of  Cards  was  vainly  built  with- 
out it.  It  was  what  Pure  Reason  could  not  prove. 
It  was  included  in  the  inventory  of  the  universe. 
It  was  found  hidden  In  the  fallen  stone,  and  in  the 
going  crumb.  It  was  the  subject  of  Euclid's  con- 
juring trick  ;  and  It  was  only  got  rid  of  at  last  by 
Babbage's  machine. 

Strength  is  the  common  term,  the  first  word  in 
the  Idealist,  as  well  as  In  the  materialist,  lexicon. 
It  Is  the  word  which  I  find  at  the  core  of  all  words, 
the  one  which  I  cannot  explain,  but  by  which  I  have 
to  explain  all  others.  It  is  the  axle  of  the  wheel  of 
self-knowledge,  the  -end  of  that  whirl  which  I  call 
my  mind.  Because  It  is  that,  I  do  not  understand 
It.  I  use  it  as  a  gibberish  word.  Somewhere  we 
must  break  off  the  endless  decimal,  and  put  on  a  dot. 
Here  is  where  I  break  off  my  decimal,  and  put  on 
my  dot. 

II 

Not  very  long  before  I  came  across  Nobel's  puz- 
zle, a  young  friend  of  mine  showed  me  one  evening 
a  common  trick.  He  placed  one  end  of  a  piece  of 
string  in  the  fire,  till  there  came  a  red  spark,  and 
then  whirled  the  string  round  so  quickly  that  instead 
of  a  spark  I  saw  a  fiery  ring.    And  while  I  watched, 


182  The  New  Word 

it  struck  me  that  I  had  before  me  at  last  in  Its  sim- 
plest form  a  puzzle  which  I  had  often  had  before 
me  in  other  forms,  jvhich  I  had  found  lurking  in 
many  quarters,  under  much  learned  language,  as  I 
was  to  find  it  in  Nobel's  Will. 

Here  was  the  question  in  its  fiery  shape. — If  the 
moving  spark  made  me  see  the  ring,  what  made  me 
see  the  spark  ? 

I  knew  that  the  ring  was  only  such  to  the  eye, 
and  that  if  I  put  out  my  finger  I  should  not  feel  a 
ring.  But  then  I  knew  farther  that  this  was  only 
because  the  spark  was  not  going  round  fast  enough. 
If  it  had  gone  fast  enough  I  should  have  felt  the 
ring,  in  the  same  way  as  when  a  wheel  goes  round 
fast  enough  the  spokes  give  a  steady  pressure. 

So,  if  it  were  true  that  things  like  stones  and  air 
are  made  up  of  tiny  crumbs  and  nothing  more,  I 
should  have  expected  to  learn  that  the  greater  hard- 
ness of  the  stone  was  due,  not  to  the  greater  stillness 
of  its  crumbs,  but  to  their  greater  speed.  I  should 
have  expected  to  learn  that  the  air  crumbs  were 
going  with  a  soft  and  gliding  pace  about  their  roomy 
abodes  in  ether,  as  heavenly  spirits  do,  while  the 
stone  crumbs  were  banging  about  in  their  narrow 
quarters  like  angry  men  on  earth.  The  stone  would 
seem  to  me  more  like  the  sleeping  top;  the  air  like 
the  top  running  down.  In  that  famous  story  of  the 
Man  in  the  Crumb,  did  not  the  gas  get  harder  as  it 
shrank  into  less  room  ?  To  speak  more  carefully, 
the  stone  would  seem  to  be  keeping  time  with  that 


Ontology:  The  End  183 

ever-quIckenlng  Inward  beat  of  strength  which  is 
called  Force,  and  the  air  with  that  ever-slowing  out- 
ward beat  which  is  called  Energy. 

All  this  is  said  by  the  word  fast  itself;  for  it  means 
quickly,  and  yet  it  also  means  firm.  These  common 
words  ought  not  to  be  despised.  Is  not  the  one  thing 
which  the  chemists  have  failed  to  melt  called  by  the 
common  folk  quicklime  ?  Words  like  these  are  reve- 
lations. They  are  the  hoarded  knowledge  of  a 
hundred  thousand  years  ;  yet  no  one  thinks  them 
worth  his  care.  They  are  the  pearls  which  we  have 
exchanged  like  foolish  savages  for  the  glass  beads 
from  oversea. 

The  guesses  of  those  old  learners  ought  not  to  be 
despised.  Are  not  the  old  elements  coming  back  to 
us  as  states  of  matter  ?  Perhaps  fire  is  a  state  of 
matter.  Perhaps  it  is  the  next  state,  not  to  the  air, 
but  to  the  stone.  I  know  nothing  of  these  things  ; 
I  only  know  that  a  flame  leaves  a  worse  bruise  than 
an  iron  hammer. 

At  the  time  when  I  asked  myself  these  questions 
the  scientific  lexicon  held  no  such  words  as  radium 
and  radio-activity.  The  only  answer  I  could  find 
to  the  puzzle  was  a  logical  one.  I  said  that  the 
spark  must  be  moving  to  and  from  me,  going  away 
and  coming  back,  going  out  and  coming  alight 
again. 

And  no  sooner  had  I  said  this  than  I  turned  it  the 
other  way  round,  and  put  the  question  :  What  if  it 
be  myself,  and  not  the  spark,  that  is  going  and  com- 


II 84  The  New  Word 

ing,  passing  to  and  fro  between  wake  and  sleep,  too 
quickly  for  me  to  catch  the  beat  ? — What  if  that 
which  we  call  life  be  such  a  going  out  and  coming  in 
again,  a  passing  to  and  fro  between  this  sphere  of 
ours  and  that  Other  Dimension  whose  symbol  is  not 
4,  but  o  ;  so  that  each  of  us  dies  and  comes  to  life 
again  a  million  times  betwixt  breath  and  breath  ? 

There  I  had  left  the  question.  I  put  the  spark 
away,  as  it  were,  in  my  mind,  and  left  it.  And  now 
I  found  it  waiting  for  me  at  the  end  of  this  inquiry. 


Ill 


I  have  left  out  of  the  story,  lest  it  should  grow 
too  long,  many  strange  things  that  befell  m.e  as  I 
came  through  the  enchanted  wood.  Other  adven- 
tures I  had,  other  goblins  I  met  and  laid  with 
Nobel's  talisman,  but  time  would  fail  me  to  tell  of 
them.     Of  the  last  one  I  will  tell. 

The  question  before  me  worded  itself  thus  : — 
What  is  the  idealist  crumb  ?  What  is  the  atom  of 
thought  ? 

The  logical  answer  led  me  back  through  ciphering, 
measure  and  materialism.  I  thought  of  one,  I 
thought  of  a  ball-shape,  I  thought  of  a  real  ball.  At 
that  stage  I  recalled  the  spark  and  I  renewed  my 
former  question  thus  : — ^What  is  the  simplest  mo- 
tion I  can  give  to  the  ball  to  make  it  stand  out  ? — 
the  Babu  word  is  exist.     How  can  the  ball  he  f 


Ontology:  The  End  185 

My  former  answer  had  been,  by  coming  and 
going,  becoming  and  unbecoming.  The  ball  must 
move  In  and  out  of  "existence"  too  fast  for  me  to 
feel  the  gaps.  But  that  was  Andronican  language 
— I  fancy  it  is  to  be  found  in  Hegel  or  some  An- 
dronican book.  Tried  by  the  golden  touchstone 
which  Nobel  had  provided,  it  showed  itself  to  be 
nonsense.  All  at  once  I  saw  that  it  might  easily 
become  very  good  counter-sense. 

I  recalled  to  my  aid  one  of  the  goblins  that  I  had 
conjured  in  the  enchanted  wood,  the  goblin  of  ideal 
dynamite.  The  fiery  shape  of  that  goblin  had  been, 
not  the  kind  of  dynamite  which  does  not  explode, 
but  the  kind  which  interplodes,  which  shrinks  vio- 
lently instead  of  swelling  violently.  I  saw  that  the 
motion  of  this  ball  of  mine  must  be  that  of  shrinking 
and  swelling,  shrinking  into  a  point,  and  swelling 
into  a  ball,  shrinking  towards  nothing,  and  swelling 
towards  Everything. 

How  could  a  real  ball  do  that  ?  Of  what  must 
such  a  ball  be  made  ? 

If  I  were  to  say  that  it  was  made  of  pure  strength, 
I  might  seem  to  talk  like  Andronikos  of  Rhodes. 
And  yet  when  we  looked  hard  at  other  balls  they 
faded  away  before  our  eyes  from  crumbs  into  whirl- 
rings,  and  from  ether  into  ethereon,  until  we  drew 
near  to  a  "  perfect  fluid  "  that  could  not  be  told  apart 
from  pure  strength.  Again,  and  since  I  wrote  what 
goes  before,  a  learner  working  towards  the  same 
point  from  the  other  side,  has  told  the  story  of  a 


i86  The  New  Word 

thousand  balls  of  pure  strength  bound  within  one 
ball. 

At  the  same  time,  while  I  had  found  that  I  could 
not  understand  the  word  strength,  I  had  yet  found 
it  to  be  the  most  real  of  all  words;  it  was  the  core  of 
the  word-book,  as  it  was  the  core  of  the  atom,  and 
as  it  was  the  core  of  the  All-Thing. — For  rightly 
to  explain  the  atom  is  rightly  to  explain  the  All- 
Thing. 

Such,  then,  and  so  formed,  was  the  thought-atoni 
which  I  found  in  my  mind,  after  ransacking  the 
store-houses  of  sense,  and  weeding  the  garden  of 
language  down  to  a  single  word. 

And  no  sooner  had  I  created  it  in  the  way  I  have 
described  than  all  at  once  it  seemed  to  change,  and 
to  be  in  nowise  a  new  Idea,  but  a  very  old  one  ;  and 
not  to  belong  to  me,  but  to  be  a  reflection,  or,  as 
it  were,  a  composite  photograph,  of  the  ideas  of 
those  great  learners  who  had  explored  Everything 
before  me  on  my  behalf.  Those  vortices  of  Des- 
cartes, those  whirlrings  in  the  ether,  all  seemed  to 
come  together  and  to  blend  in  the  ball  which  I 
thought  that  I  had  shaped. 

By  their  means  I  was  enabled  to  see  the  ball  more 
clearly  and  to  guess  that  it  might  turn  out  to  be, 
not  an  Andronican  creation,  but  a  real  ball,  a  ball 
of  living  strength.  And  since  living  strength  does 
not  shrink  and  swell  along  straight  lines,  I  caught  a 
glimpse  of  mysterious  spirals  leading  inwards  and 
outwards  ;  and  then  I  knew  that  this  was  a  magic 


Ontology:  The  End  187 

ball  indeed,  and  that  It  was  far  older  than  the  great 
astronomers,  old  when  there  was  yet  no  cleavage 
between  astronomy  and  astrology — between  the  lore 
of  heaven  and  the  lore  of  Heaven  ;  when  man  felt 
knowledge  flowing  in  on  him  from  all  sides,  and 
counted  it  all  divine  ;  it  was  as  old  as  that  forgotten 
voice  of  the  Chaldean  whose  mystic  oracle  was 
conned  by  the  Theurgists  in  the  last  hours  before 
the  Shadow  fell  upon  mankind  : 

"The  God  of  the  World,  everlasting,  boundless, 
Young  and  old,  of  a  spiral  Form." 


IV 


The  figure  of  strength  turning  inside  out  is  now 
before  us.  It  is  strength  shrinking  into  a  point, 
and  swelling  into  a  ball,  the  inward  beat  changing 
into  the  outward  beat,  and  the  outward  back  into 
the  inward,  as  force  changes  into  energy,  and  energy 
into  force.  So  far  it  is  merely  a  mathematical  figure. 
Yet  it  will  serve  to  mark  the  first  parting  of  the 
ways  between  the  Materialist  and  the  Idealist. 

The  Materialist,  as  his  name  bewrays,  tries  to  be- 
lieve in  Matter.  He  does  not  believe  in  it,  because 
no  man  can  do  so,  but  his  mind  is  turned  matter- 
ward.  The  mind  of  the  Idealist  Is  turned  strength- 
ward.  The  Idealist  tries  to  believe  In  United 
Strength,  commonly  called  the  Absolute.     He  does 


1 88  The  New  Word 

not  succeed  any  better  than  the  Materialist.  But 
that  is  the  way  in  which  the  two  minds  are  first  op- 
posed. It  is  the  difference  between  potential  and 
kinetic.  And  this  difference  is  exhibited  in  the  field 
of  Literature  in  the  difference  between  the  Acade- 
mician and  the  Prophet.  The  Academician  cannot 
write  without  a  meaning,  nor  the  Prophet  without 
words.  But  the  one  is  turned  formward  and  the 
other  spiritward. 

However,  that  distinction  is  partly  unreal.  It 
partakes  of  the  unreality  of  Matter  Itself.  The  real 
distinction  is  the  unreal  one  repeated  in  terms  of 
Strength.  As  we  have  seen,  the  Materialist  has 
given  up  his  mock-belief  in  Matter,  and  the  Idealist 
must  now  give  up  his  mock-belief  in  the  Absolute. 
The  two  meet  on  the  common  ground  of  Strength. 
The  mathematical  figure  of  the  strength-ball  is  not 
other  than  the  figure  which  has  been  forming  in 
the  mind  of  great  materialist  learners.  It  is  in  their 
ways  of  looking  at  it  that  the  real  difference  between 
the  two  minds  will  be  found. 

We  cannot  think  of  strength  going  only  one  way, 
or  shrinking  in  any  measure  without  swelling  in 
equal  measure.  We  cannot  think  of  strength  going 
out  into  the  dustbin  of  Andronicus  Rhodius.  Nor 
can  we  think  of  it  shrinking  Into  the  point  of  Euclid, 
and  staying  there.  As  fast  as  It  whirls  Inward  it 
must  swirl  outward,  and  the  whirl  and  swirl  must 
compensate  each  other.  So  that  the  strength-ball 
ought  rightly  to  be  called  a  Whirl-Swirl, 


Ontology:  The  End  189 

Now  the  materialist  is  busy  measuring  the  whirl, 
and  as  it  seems  to  me  his  eyes  are  sometimes  so  far 
dazed  by  watching  it  as  to  be  no  longer  able  to  mark 
the  swirl.  Again  his  speech  bewrays  him,  when  he 
uses  words  like  whirl  and  universe,  as  though  he 
had  nothing  but  a  whirlpool  before  him.  One  ma- 
terialist has  likened  the  life  of  man  to  a  whirlpool. 
Whereas  what  we  have  before  us  is  more  like  a  wa- 
terspout, and  the  spiral  of  life  points  upward  instead 
of  downward.  Now  the  business  of  the  Idealist  is 
measuring  the  swirl. 

This  is  the  real  parting  of  the  ways.  And  the 
unreality  of  the  other  is  shown  by  this,  that  when 
the  Materialist  does  enter  the  field  of  literature,  his 
work  is  apt  to  be  unbearably  informal,  and  his  words 
unbearably  bad  ;  and  his  highest  achievement  Is 
History  ;  whereas  when  the  Idealist  enters  the  same 
field,  his  work  is  apt  to  take  on  the  severe  and  crystal 
form  of  poetry  ;  his  words  are  apt  to  be  the  most 
careful  words  ;  and  his  highest  achievement  is  the 
Creed.  And  all  that  is  the  turning  inside  out  of 
strength. 

It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  that  it  Is  the  word 
Swirl  which  we  have  been  in  search  of  all  along,  as 
the  interpretation  of  the  word  Idealist.  I  still  like 
it  better  than  radio-activity.  The  swirl  is  the  Inver- 
sion of  the  whirl.  It  is  a  whirl  going  the  other  way. 
It  is  to  whirl  what  Energy  was  to  Force.  It  is  a  very 
common  word.  The  children  know  It  well.  And 
yet — what  sounds  too  strange  for  a  coincidence — 


190  The  New  Word 

the  learned  Doctor  Latham,  in  his  four  huge  vol- 
umes, somehow  has  succeeded  in  leaving  out  this 
very  word. 

So,  after  diving  through  the  end  of  the  whirl,  I 
have  come  up  in  the  swirl,  bringing  in  my  hand  this 
poor  little  forgotten  word,  shimmering  to  my  eyes 
like  a  tiny  seed-pearl  of  verihood,  though  it  should 
show,  to  other  eyes  like  a  glass  bead,  not  worth  the 
fetching  up. 

Let  us  put  this  word  inside  the  Testator's  word, 
as  the  child  puts  a  little  candle  inside  a  toy  house, 
and  look  how  it  will  light  it  up. 


My  selfish  interest  in  this  inquiry  has  here  reached 
its  end.  The  search  for  the  right  name  of  Idealism 
has  brought  me  to  the  right  name  of  Truth.  I  have 
found  it,  not  in  the  tidily  arranged  and  ticketed 
glass-cases  of  learned  museums,  but  in  the  lonely 
wind-swept  barrow  of  the  Viking.  I  am  as  one  of 
those  who — 

From   grass-grown   hills, 
Their   ancient   and   forgotten   burial-places, 
Draw  forth  the  dragon  hoard  of  gold  and  gems. 

And  lo  !  the  right  Name  is  a  mighty  spell,  and  no 
sooner  is  it  uttered  than  Verihood  herself  is  called 


Ontology:  The  End  19I! 

out  of  her  enchanted  sleep  ;  she  stirs,  and  the  vain 
cerements  are  rent  ;  she  rises  up,  and  the  gravestone 
is  rolled  away. 

Well  did  they  who  cast  her  into  that  trance,  and 
bound  the  graveclothes  round  about  her,  and  set 
the  gravestone  in  its  place, — well  did  they  know  the 
might  that  is  in  Names.  Is  it  not  written  in  one  of 
the  books  of  the  enchanters, — "  Thou  shalt  not  take 
my  Name  in  vain  ; "  and  in  another,' — 

**  Lo !  dreadful  faces  show,  and,  threatening  Troy, 
The  mighty  Names  of  Gods." 

Magical  lore  is  this:  the  secret  lies  here:  I  also 
am  a  magician  ;  I  understand  that  other  oracle  of 
the  Chaldeans — 

"  Never  change  native  Names ; 
For  there  are  Names  in  every  nation,  God-given, 
Of  untold  power  in  the  Mysteries." 


FOURTEENTH  HEAD 


THE  MAGIC  CRYSTAL 

Pure  Verihood. — i.  The  Art  of  Speech. — 2.  The  Sign. 
— 3.     The  Shape. — ^4.     The  Symbel. — 5.     Ideal  Dynamite. 

00  far  the  whirl-swirl  is  a  mathematical  figure. 
^  That  is  to  say  it  is  a  word,  like  Euclid's  tri- 
angle.    It  is  Pure  Verihood. 

To  be  more  than  a  word  it  must  take  shape.  Veri- 
hood must  put  on  falsehood  ere  it  can  dwell  among 
us.     The  outline  must  be  gained  in  battle. 

It  is  my  business  to  write  this  word  more  dis- 
tinctly, knowing  that  what  we  gain  in  clearness  we 
must  lose  in  verihood.  So,  even  a  work  of  an  ideal- 
ist tendency  cannot  be  quite  true,  because  literature 
cannot  be  quite  true.  We  can  only  draw  the 
round  by  drawing  a  series  of  overlapping  straight 
lines.  We  can  only  paint  light  by  painting  the 
shadows  cast  by  light.  We  can  only  give  to  our 
God  the  figure  of  an  Idol.  Is  not  that  why  the  per- 
fect Idealist  uttered  his  cryptic  saying, — "  They  who 
know  do  not  tell;  they  who  tell  do  not  know." 

I 

These  words  which  I  am  writing,  and  you  are 
reading,  these  black  marks  upon  white  paper,  are 
only  signs  for  sounds,  as  the  crotchets  and  quavers 

193 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal       193 

on  a  sheet  of  music  are.  And  the  sounds  themselves 
are  also  in  their  turn  signs  for  strength,  in  this  case 
the  strength  within  me,  which  Is  called  feeling.  I 
write  this  book  to  show  you  my  feeling,  to  make  you 
feel  how  I  feel.     It  Is  a  cheque  drawn  on  your  mind. 

Words  are,  like  money,  a  medium  of  exchange, 
and  the  sureness  with  which  they  can  be  used  varies 
not  only  with  the  character  of  the  coins  themselves, 
but  also  with  the  character  of  the  things  they  buy, 
and  that  of  the  men  who  tender  and  receive  them. 
When  we  consider  that  the  value  of  the  American 
dollar  changes  from  day  to  day  in  America  itself, 
and  when  we  read  the  books  In  which  political 
economists  pursue  their  endless  task  of  trying  to  tell 
us  what  is  wealth,  we  shall  wonder  no  longer  at  the 
wasted  toil  of  the  logicians. 

But  words  are  not  the  only  medium  of  exchange, 
any  more  than  gold  and  silver  are.  In  NIgerland 
the  coins  most  in  use  are  slaves  and  cowrie  shells. 
So,  In  wild  lands,  and  In  old  days,  men  have  told 
each  other  how  they  felt  by  other  means  than  words. 

Music  is  one  such  means.  Another  Is  the  mystic 
dance.  A  black  man  who  was  asked  concerning 
some  religious  thought  answered, — "  I  do  not  dance 
that  dance."  The  dervish  dances  his  worship  of  the 
Wheel  of  Heaven.  The  Christian  kneels  to  show 
he  Is  afraid  of  God. — That  Roman  critic  who  con- 
demned tragedies  In  which  the  knot  was  cut  by  a 
god  coming  out  of  a  machine,  forgot  why  the  word 
tragedy  meant  Goat-Song  ;  forgot  that  the  tragedy 


194  The  New  Word 

was  a  Mystery  whose  very  end  it  was  to  show  the 
god's  power  over  men  ;  forgot  that  the  Song  of  the 
Goat  began  when  the  stargroup  called  the  Goat  led 
forth  the  great  dance  of  the  constellations,  as  it  is 
written  in  the  Samaritan  copy  of  Genesis, — "  In  the 
beginning  the  Goat  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth."  Machines  are  a  clumsy  kind  of  writing,  but 
tragedy  is  still  the  play  that  shows  men  overcome  by 
a  power  outside  them,  greater  than  themselves. 

The  language  of  clothes  still  lingers  in  our  palaces 
and  churches,  our  courts  and  barracks.  The  lan- 
guage of  the  arms  and  hands  is  only  frozen  by  the 
long  northern  nights.  Letters  themselves  are  half- 
breeds,  degenerate  pictures  merging  into  signs. 
Writing  flowered  in  the  sculptural  hieroglyphs  of 
Egypt,  as  afterwards  in  the  illuminated  missals  of 
the  monks.  But  It  began  in  rude  notches  on  a  stick, 
and  rude  knots  on  a  thread,  serving,  as  knots  on 
handkerchiefs  still  serve  the  children,  as  reminders. 
The  picture  that  reminds  us  Is  a  Sign. 

Before  I  draw  the  outline  of  the  whirl-swirl,  I 
will  draw  its  sign. 


II 

The  Cross  is  the  rude  picture  of  a  knot.  As  such 
it  is  the  sign  of  Matter  ;  and  the  Man  on  the  cross 
signifies  the  thought  that  Matter  is  Evil.  The 
Cross  by  itself  is  pure  ugliness.     The  Man  on  the 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal       195 

Cross  is  a  tremendous  allegory,  whose  full  interpre- 
tation has  yet  to  come. 

The  root  significance  of  the  Cross  is  not  altered 
because  it  has  also  signified  other  things  to  other 
minds  ;  to  some,  the  crossing  of  the  sun  from  south 
to  north  at  Easter,  to  others  a  material  Cross  on 
which  Rome  in  the  flesh  impaled  Idealism  in  the 
flesh. 

The  men  who  adopted  the  Cross  as  the  sign  of 
the  religion  which  that  Idealist  has  been  accused 
of  founding,  were  men  whose  habit  of  mind  led  them 
to  look  for  more  than  one  meaning  in  signs.  For 
them  the  heaven  and  the  earth  abounded  in  double 
meanings,  in  what  I  will  call  ontological  puns.  The 
days  of  the  week  were  seven,  the  moving  planets 
were  seven,  the  stars  in  the  Plough  were  seven,  and 
the  number  seven  was  sacred  for  all  these  reasons 
put  together.  By  such  frail  supports  they  groped 
their  way  towards  truths  which  we  have  since 
learned  and  measured,  so  that  their  mistakes  are 
prophecies. 

The  Cross  is  the  Sign  of  Matter,  and  as  such  it 
reminds  us  of  the  nature  of  Matter.  Not  only  is 
it  the  rude  picture  of  a  knot,  that  is  to  say,  of  a 
joint  in  the  network,  but  it  shows  us  how  the  knot 
is  made.  It  is  by  two  lines  of  strings  meeting  cross- 
wise. Thus  it  reminds  us  that  two  Ways  of  Strength 
must  meet  crosswise  to  become  entangled.  And 
their  entanglement  is  their  arrest.  We  know  they 
do  not  rest.     The  strain  of  forward  motion  turns 


196  The  New  Word 

into  the  strain  of  pressure.  The  soldiers  do  not 
halt,  but  they  mark  time,  and  mark  it  faster  than 
they  marched.  The  wrestlers  tremble  as  they  lock. 
The  imprisoned  crumbs  beat  their  incalculable  wings 
against  the  cage.  The  word  fast  is  true  in  its  pro- 
phetic meaning. 

Nevertheless  the  word  fast  is  also  true  in  its  his- 
torical meaning.  The  net  which  stops  the  way  is  in 
itself  wrought  by  a  stoppage  of  the  Ways  of 
Strength.  The  nature  of  Matter  is  Fixity,  and  it 
has  no  more  ultimate  nature  than  this.  The  ulti- 
mate nature  of  Materialism  is  the  worship  of  Fixity, 
under  a  hundred  names,  whether  Matter  or  Shape, 
Exactness  or  Certainty,  or  Rest  or  Death. — The 
enemy  of  Fixity  is  Change. 

What  is  the  sign  of  Change  ? 

The  Chinese  sign  for  Everything  is  a  point  in  the 
middle  of  a  round.  Viewed  as  still  figures  this  sign 
and  the  Cross  offer  the  utmost  unlikeness  to  one 
another.  But  both  arc  still  figures  ;  to  be  the  sign 
of  Change,  the  Round  ought  to  be  turning  into  the 
End,  and  returning  into  the  Round. 

The  wheel  of  the  Buddhists  is  a  better  sign.  Btit 
the  motion  of  the  wheel  is  not  the  full  motion  of  the 
Whirl-swirl,  in  which  wheels  pass  into  lesser  wheels, 
and  back  again  into  greater  wheels. 

The  least  false  sign  that  I  can  draw  is  a  line  turn- 
ing from  a  round  into  an  end  and  back  again  into 
a  round.  The  line  going  inward  is  the  whirl,  and 
the  line  coming  outward  is  the  swirl.     It  goes  in 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal       197 

black  and  comes  out  white.  And  according  as  a 
man  judges  the  black  line  or  the  white  to  be  more 
real,  he  writes  himself  Materialist  or  Idealist. — Is 
it  not  written  in  the  book  of  the  perfect  Idealist  that 
the  hollow  within  the  bowl  is  more  to  be  regarded 
than  the  bowl,  inasmuch  as  the  bowl  is  made  for  the 
sake  of  the  hollow. 

I  find  that  I  have  drawn  a  Spring. 


Ill 

From  the  language  of  Measure  we  rise  to  that  of 
Matter  ;  the  Sign  grows  to  a  shape. 

Let  us  begin  from  the  real  thing  from  which  the 
likeness  is  to  be  withdrawn,  namely  the  waterspout. 
How  does  a  waterspout  behave  ? 

The  story  of  the  waterspout,  as  it  is  told  in  books, 
shows  it  to  be  a  brief-lived  tree.  A  cloud  is  whirl- 
ing downwards,  and  thrusting  out  its  whirlpoint 
towards  the  sea,  like  a  sucking  mouth.  The  sea 
below  whirls  upward,  thrusting  out  its  whirlpoint 
towards  the  cloud.  The  two  ends  meet,  and  the 
water  swept  up  in  the  sea-whirl  passes  on  into  the 


198  The  New  Word 

cloud-whirl,  and  swirls  up  through  it,  as  it  were 
gain-saying  it.  So  in  a  tree  the  sap  whirls  upward 
from  the  roots  into  the  trunk,  and  then  again  swirls 
upward  into  the  boughs  and  leaves,  meeting  the  air 
and  light. 

In  the  ideal  waterspout,  not  only  does  the  water 
swirl  upward  through  the  cloud-whirl,  but  the  cloud 
swirls  downward  through  the  sea-whirl.  To  make 
their  passage  through  each  other  easier  for  the 
trained  mind  to  follow,  let  us  change  the  water  into 
air,  and  the  cloud  into  ether. 

The  ideal  waterspout  is  not  yet  complete.  The 
upper  half  must  unfold  like  a  fan,  only  it  unfolds 
all  around  like  a  flower-cup  ;  and  it  does  not  leave 
the  cup  empty,  so  that  this  flower  is  like  a  chrysan- 
themum. At  the  same  time  the  lower  half  has  un- 
folded in  the  same  way,  till  there  are  two  chrysan- 
themums, back  to  back.  In  one  the  air  is  whirling 
inward,  and  the  ether  swirling  outward  ;  in  the  other 
it  is  the  ether  that  whirls,  and  the  air  that  swirls. 

Now  let  us  change  the  air  into  ether,  and  the  ether 
into  ethereon,  and  so  on  into  more  and  more  "per- 
fect fluids,"  till  we  have  pure  strength  whirling  in 
on  all  sides,  and  swirling  out  again. 

It  is  the  pure  Shape,  reached  by  the  same  road  by 
which  the  mathematician  reaches  his  flats  and,  lines. 
It  is  the  grin  without  the  cat.  It  is  the  ideal  whirl- 
swirl. 

It  is  strength  turning  Inside  out.  Such  Is 
the    true    beat    of    strength,    the    first    beat,  the 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal      199 

one  from  which  all  others  part,  the  beat  which 
we  feel  In  all  things  that  come  within  our  measure, 
in  ourselves,  and  In  our  starry  world,  the  beat  that 
Is  called  Action  and  Reaction. 

Yet  this  ideal  is  not  yet  an  idol.  The  whirl-swirl 
Is  not  truly  formed  Into  a  ball.  Every  real  ball  we 
know  of  has  an  outline  ;  but  this  one  has  no  outline, 
except  eternity.    How  shall  we  clothe  it  with  a  skin  ? 


IV 


What  is  a  real  skin?  It  Is  Matter.  It  is  indeed 
a  network  through  whose  pores  encompassing 
strength  flows  In  and  out.  The  heat  waves  reach 
the  blood,  the  light  waves  break  through  the  eye- 
ball into  the  brain  ;  others,  more  subtle,  to  which  we 
have  not  yet  given  names,  doubtless  touch  the  in- 
visible membranes  of  undiscovered  cells  within. 

The  mathematical  skin  Is  Time.  The  whirl-swirl 
ebbs  and  flows  between  the  turning-point  within  and 
the  returnlng-point  without,  and  the  moment  at 
which  the  swirl  changes  Into  the  whirl  is  its  outline. 

To  be  real,  the  outline  must  be  gained  in  battle. 
And  since  the  battle  must  go  on  all  round  at  once, 
it  must  be  waged  against  another  whirl-swirl,  greater 
than  the  first  one,  and  Inclosing  it.  If  the  cloud 
had  Inclosed  the  water,  or  the  ethereon  the  ether, 
the  inner  whirl-swirl  would  have  been  shaped  Into  a 
ball. 


20O  The  New  Word 

If  both  the  inner  and  the  outer  whirl-swirls  are 
of  pure  strength,  and  both  keep  the  same  time, 
shrinking  and  swelling  together,  then  one  will  not 
feel  the  other.  Where  there  is  no  resistance  there  is 
no  existence,  and  so  the  two  whirl-swirls  will  be  one. 
And  that  is  the  demonstration  of  the  Nirvana  of  the 
Buddhists. 

But  both  do  not  keep  the  same  time,  any  more 
than  the  waves  of  the  incoming  tide  all  reach  the 
same  height  upon  the  shore.  The  farthest  wave,  as 
it  ebbs  back,  meets  the  next  wave  flowing  forward; 
and  so  the  outer  strength,  as  it  whirls  inward  from 
its  longer  period,  meets  the  inner  strength  swirling 
outward,  and  resisting  it.  And  that  meeting  Is  a 
real  outline.     The  inner  whirl-swirl  is  created. 

Again,  the  pressure  of  the  greater  whirl-swirl  rolls 
up  the  inner  one  into  less  room;  and  what  is  lost  in 
space  is  gained  in  time.  The  beat  of  the  inner  Whirl- 
swirl  is  quickened,  and  quickness  is  hardness.  And 
in  this  greater  hardness  of  the  inner  strength  we  have 
the  very  difference  between  ethereon  and  ether,  be- 
tween ether  and  "ponderable  matter." — Strength 
has  foamed  into  stuff. 

Consider  this  idea.  Consider  this  inner  strength, 
coming  and  going,  turning  and  returning,  millions 
of  beats  In  every  tick  of  secular  time,  while,  throb- 
bing through  the  network  woven  by  their  meeting, 
the  over-strength  comes  and  goes  faster  than  flashes 
In  a  diamond. 

It  is  no  longer  a  mere  word.     It  is  a  magic  crystal, 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal      201 

and  by  looking  long  into  it,  you  will  see  wonderful 
meanings  come  and  go.  It  will  change  colour  like 
an  opal  while  you  gaze,  reflecting  the  thoughts  in 
your  own  mind.  It  is  a  most  chameleon-like  ball. 
It  has  this  deeper  magic  that  it  will  show  you,  not 
only  the  thoughts  you  knew  about  before,  but  other 
thoughts  you  did  not  know  of,  old,  drowned 
thoughts,  hereditary  thoughts  ;  it  will  awaken  the 
slumbering  ancestral  ghosts  that  haunt  the  brain  ; 
you  will  remember  things  you  used  to  know  and  feel 
long,  long  ago. 

What  do  you  see  in  the  magic  crystal  ? 

Do  you  see  the  Atom,  the  only  real  one,  the  point 
of  strength  within  the  All-Strength  ? 

Do  you  see  the  crumb,  the  tiny  crystal  that 
breathes  ever  so  faintly,  swelling  and  shrinking  too 
slightly  for  our  measures,  while  in  and  out  of  it 
there  throbs  that  beat  of  strength  we  call  attraction 
and  repulsion  ? 

Do  you  see  the  sun's  orb,  not  fixed  as  we  suppose, 
but  nearly  in  the  middle  of  our  sun-whirl,  swelling 
and  shrinking  in  great  tides  of  fire,  while  it  breathes 
in  and  out  those  throbs  that  we  call  Energy  and 
Force  ?  Or  is  it  this  planet  that  you  see,  not  al- 
together weaned,  but  clinging  like  a  suckling  to  its 
mother's  breast,  drinking  in  life,  and  giving  it  forth 
again  ?  Ourselves,  involved  in  the  vast  cocoon  of 
silken  light,  do  we  not  seem  to  other  eyes,  watching 
from  other  orbs,  to  be  flame-spirits  moving  in  a 
burning  world  ? 


202  The  New  Word 

Is  it  the  mite  you  see,  the  tiny  life-crumb,  fire- 
begotten,  water-born,  air-fed,  earth-clad,  of  which 
we  know  neither  the  beginning  nor  the  end  ? 

Is  it  the  seed,  feeding  upon  the  earth-strength, 
and  sending  it  forth  again  in  roots  and  shoots  ?  Is 
it  the  living  waterspout,  through  which  strength 
courses  to  and  fro  from  leaves  to  roots,  and  back 
again  to  leaves  ; — is  it  the  Tree  Yggdrasil  ? 

Or  is  it  rather  the  cell,  swelling  and  shrinking 
within  the  body-strength,  while  within  the  cell  there 
swells  and  shrinks  the  nucleus,  and  within  that  the 
nucleolus,  and  within  that  what  lesser  nucleolites  we 
have  not  measured  ? 

Suppose  it  is  yourself.  Suppose  it  is  your  heart 
that  pants  and  throbs,  while  through  it  the  blood 
whirls  in  and  swirls  out  in  systole  and  diastole.  Sup- 
pose it  is  your  inner  strength,  swelling  and  shrink- 
ing along  its  nervous  tracery,  while  through  it  the 
great  Outer-Strength  comes  and  g>oes,  coming  in 
sense,  and  going  in  emotion. — That  word  emotion 
is  not  an  Andronican  cipher.  It  means  outgoing. 
It  means  the  swirl.  Those  old  men  who  used  It 
first  knew  well  enough  what  it  meant.  They  were 
not  sleep-walkers  as  we  are. 

Suppose  we  say  it  is  the  Strength  Within,  played 
upon  by  the  Strength  Without.  Suppose  we  say, 
in  words  we  hardly  understand,  that  what  we  call 
the  Body  is  a  network  woven  between  the  tiny 
Strength  Within  and  the  great  Strength  Without. 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal      203 


N. 


I  have  drawn  near  to  certain  old  familiar  words, 
which  once  were  good  and  beautiful.  But  they  are 
become  so  deeply  tarnished  by  evil  use,  so  bent  and 
battered,  that  I  dare  not  use  them  ;  for  if  I  were 
to,  I  should  feel  that  I  was  no  longer  trying  to  write 
truly. 

On  the  other  hand  it  seems  to  me  that  as  fast  as 
some  words  are  becoming  ugly  and  meaningless, 
other  words  long  deemed  ugly  and  meaningless  are 
becoming  beautiful  and  full  of  meaning.  The  old 
confused  cries  of  the  savage  are  changing  into 
prophecies  ;  and  one  fairy  tale  succeeds  another. 
The  earth  is  turning  eastwards,  and  certain  stars  are 
going  down  below  the  horizon,  while  other  bright 
forgotten  Signs  are  rising  on  us  out  of  the  deep. 
lYet  it  is  still  the  same  earth  and  the  same  heaven. 

This  is  the  virtue  of  the  magic  crystal  In  which 
each  one  sees  himself.  It  Is  a  touchstone  of  words. 
It  is,  as  I  have  said,  itself  a  word. 

How  shall  I  find  courage  to  offer  it  to  those  great 
learners  who  have  built  the  glorious  temple  they  call 
Science,  wherein  I  see  them  standing  like  arch- 
bishops at  the  altar,  talking  with  God  ;  while  I  am 
no  more  than  the  little  ragamuffin  who  has  been  put 
outside  to  clean  the  steps?  T  have  not  listened  to 
them  as  I  ought.  Even  in  tbe  last  age  there  was  a 
boy  outside  on  the  steps,  looking  on,  and  thinking 


204  The  New  Word 

his  own  thoughts,  while  the  archbishops  within 
were  muttering  solemnly  their  Mediterranean  In- 
cantations ;  and  when  they  came  to  the  heart  of 
their  mystery,  and  recited  the  words — Hoc  est  cor- 
pus, the  boy  outside  repeated  to  himself — Hocus 
Pocus.  That  was  how  the  Mediterranean  words 
sounded  to  him. 

But  now  suppose  that  boy  has  found  a  seed-pearl, 
or  what  he  thinks  may  be  a  seed-pearl,  on  the  steps; 
what  must  he  do  ?  He  knows  it  is  not  his.  He 
knows  the  great  archbishop  must  have  dropped  it 
from  his  jewelled  robes,  as  he  was  passing  in.  So 
all  the  boy  can  do  Is  to  go  up  to  the  archbishop  as 
he  comes  out  again,  and  say, — "  Please,  sir.  Is  this 
yours  ?  " 

And  lest  my  archbishops  should  not  understand 
the  street  boy's  words,  and  should  not  recognise 
their  seed-pearl,  I  will  name  It  for  their  sakes  by  an 
archbishop's  word. 

That  is  to  say,  Metastrophe. 

By  this  word  I  mean  more  than  the  archbishops 
have  meant  by  their  word  metabolism.  I  mean, 
not  growth  and  decay,  but  growth  turning  Into  decay, 
and  decay  turning  Into  growth.  I  mean  involution 
in  the  midst  of  evolution.  I  mean  life  turning  inside 
out.  And  I  mean  more  than  life  ;  I  mean  also  the 
expression  of  life.  Metastrophe  Is  a  mood,  and  in 
so  far  as  we  attain  this  mood,  so  will  the  Strength 
Within  us  chime  more  and  more  sweetly  with  the 
Strength  Without ;  not  in  dead  unity,  but  In  living 


Metastrophe:  The  Magic  Crystal      205 

unison,  and  the  faint  gladness  of  our  earthly  voices 
climb  and  thread  the  thunder  music  rolling  out  of 
Heaven. 

Here  is  Ideal  dynamite  that  shall  break  up  the 
bony  knobs  that  clog  the  brain,  and  set  thought 
free.  I  cast  this  little  seed  into  the  mind.  If  it 
be  a  true  life-seed,  I  have  no  fear  but  that  it  will 
take  root  and  grow.  It  will  be  slower  than  the  other 
kind  of  dynamite;  it  may  take  a  thousand  years; 
but  it  will  do  its  work  more  surely  in  the  end.  P'or 
it  is  stronger  than  the  material  dynamite.  It  is 
alive.     It  will  grow. 


FIFTEENTH  HEAD 


THE  ELF 

Idealist  Science. — I.  Oneself. — 2.  The  Changeling. 
— 3.  The  Gospel  of  Imagination — 4.  The  Parable  of 
Life. 

"E  have  now  made  the  passage  from  thoughts 
to  things,  or  from  words  to  reality.  The 
whirl-swirl  is  no  longer  a  mathematical  figure.  We 
have  found  it  embodied  within  a  greater  Whirl- 
Swirl,  without  which  it  could  not  be. 

So  far  I  have  spoken  of  these  two  realities  as  the 
Strength  Within  and  the  Strength  Without.  The 
names  in  vulgar  use  are  Soul  and  God.  We  see 
already  that  it  is  not  the  task  of  the  Idealist  to  prove 
that  there  are  such  things  as  a  Soul  and  a  God. 
Even  if  there  could  be  such  a  thing  as  proof,  it  could 
not  prove  the  beginnings  of  proof.  There  are  the 
two  points  from  which  we  begin  to  reckon.  They 
are  the  elements  of  the  mind.  To  try  to  prove 
them  is  like  trying  to  lift  the  fulcrum  by  means  of 
the  lever.  In  establishing  these  two  forethoughts  I 
have  worked,  not  as  an  idealist,  but  as  an  ontologist 
— as  a  learner  of  what  words  mean.  I  have  been 
cutting  open  words  and  looking  inside  them,  no 
more  than  that. 

206 


Biology:  The  Elf  207 

The  science  of  the  Idealist,  like  that  of  his  partner, 
the  Materialist,  begins  with  the  relationship  between 
these  two  Strengths. 

Science  is  closer  knowledge,  and  all  knowledge 
Is  of  relations.  As  I  have  said,  we  measure  strength 
by  measuring  its  ways  ;  and  those  ways  are  outlined 
for  us  by  other  ways  that  meet  them.  The  famous 
command,  Know  Thyself,  is  meaningless  as  it  stands, 
because  we  can  only  know  the  Strength  Within  by 
knowing  its  relations  with  the  Strength  Without. 
Hence  Berkeley's  puzzle  for  the  atheists  was  itself 
the  only  perfect  atheism,  inasmuch  as  It  denied  the 
Strength  Without. 

The  two  great  sciences  which  meet  in  my  own 
science  measure  these  relations  from  opposite  points, 
and  that  is  the  right  distinction  between  them. 
There  is  a  vulgar  distinction  between  them,  which 
ought  to  be  done  away  with,  namely  as  to  the  rela- 
tions which  they  measure.  I  may  illustrate  both  by 
means  of  the  noble  saying, — "  The  Word  of  God  Is 
the  creation  we  behold." 

Uttered  by  the  devout  Thomas  Paine  as  a  rebuke 
to  the  idolators  of  Mediterranean  manuscripts,  that 
saying  Is  true.  But  It  is  not  the  whole  truth.  It 
Is  just  one-fourth  of  the  truth.  As  we  have  seen, 
the  Outer  Strength  flows  In  and  out  of  the  Inner 
Strength,  whirling  as  sense,  and  swirling  as  emotion. 
The  swirl  is  as  much  a  revelation  as  the  whirl,  and 
Ideal  science  is  the  science  of  emotion.  It  is  because 
the  manuscripts  are  a  precious  record  of  emotion, 


2o8  The  New  Word 

that  they  deserve  to  be  called  a  revelation,  though 
not  to  be  worshipped  as  the  only  revelation.  Why 
did  Paine  found  the  Higher  Criticism  of  the  Bible  ? 
Certainly  not  because  of  any  prompting  from  the 
visible  creator,  but  in  obedience  to  the  God  Within. 

In  the  second  place  the  creation  we  behold  is  not 
the  complete  record  of  the  whirl.  Of  course  I  do 
not  confine  the  meaning  of  the  word  behold  to  sight. 
But  it  is  vulgarly  confined  to  those  ways  of  strength 
which  are  detected  by  the  outward  organs  known 
as  the  five  senses,  or,  more  carefully  speaking,  to 
those  ways  whose  impressions  are  recorded  by  the 
body  distinctly  enough  for  us  to  read.  We  know 
that  with  our  narrow  sense  scale  we  can  only 
measure  a  few  ways  of  strength.  We  mark,  as  it 
were,  the  movement  of  the  minute-hand  upon  the 
dial  of  the  All-Thing.  But  far  outside  our  measures 
there  lags  an  hour-hand  whose  slow  crawl  across 
utter  space  shows  like  changelessness  ;  and  far  within 
them  there  quickens  a  second-hand  whose  trip  is  like 
a  sleep. 

From  time  to  time  Material  science  takes  new 
ways  of  strength  into  her  field  of  measurement  ; 
till  when  they  are  exploited  by  the  ignorant.  And 
hence  the  vulgar  error  which  ranks  such  thoroughly 
material  quests  as  those  of  the  mesmerist,  the 
spiritualist  and  the  faith-healer,  because  they  are 
not  acknowledged  by  Material  science,  as  branches 
of  Ideal  science.  With  such  things,  true  or  false. 
the  Idealist  has  little  more  to  do  than  with  wireless 


Biology:  The  Elf  209 

telegraphy  or  radiant  Matter.  If  there  should  prove 
hereafter  to  be  a  real  Death-Shape,  or  as  the  learned 
would  naturally  proceed  to  name  it,  Necromorph, 
able  to  communicate  with  the  living,  it  could  be 
recognised  as  a  physical  organism,  and  its  powers 
and  functions  would  fall  to  be  investigated  by  a  new 
branch  of  physical  biology  to  be  called,  perhaps, 
Necrology. 

Meanwhile  the  Idealist  has  more  important  busi- 
ness in  hand.  His  business  is  measuring  the  swirl. 
His  science  Is  the  science  of  expression.  And  hence 
the  point  he  measures  from  is  the  turning  point 
Within. 


I 


I  seem  to  be  in  the  same  case  with  the  wild  man 
who  said  there  was  a  man  inside  the  steam-engine, 
and  with  the  learned  men  who  thought  there  was  a 
man  Inside  their  stones  and  crumbs,  although  they 
would  not  say  so.  I  have  been  talking  of  the  Inner 
Strength,  when  I  meant  the  Man  Inside. 

It  is  a  very  common  case  to  be  in,  though  few  of 
us  are  so  frank  about  it  as  the  wild  man.  We  have 
seen  how  hard  the  chemists  and  the  physicists  tried 
to  hide  their  men,  and  how  cunningly  Euclid  hid 
the  man  who  moved  his  flying  triangle.  Man,  as 
Protagoras  put  it,  is  the  measure  of  Everything. 
That  is  the  human  equation  which  no  Copernicus  can 
do  away  with.     Man  measures  all  things  from  him- 


210  The  New  Word 

self  and  by  himself  ;  and  he  speaks  most  truthfully, 
though  never  truly,  when  he  openly  confesses  his 
infirmity  in  his  words. 

Many  efforts  have  been  made  to  call  the  Man  la- 
side  by  Andronican  names.  I  have  heard  him  called 
the  Ego,  and  I  have  made  the  not  very  difficult  dis- 
covery that  Ego  is  a  Latin  word  which  means  I. 
Whereas  the  right  name  would  be  rather  Me-Ego, 
the  Me  facing  toward  the  whirl,  and  the  Ego  facing 
toward  the  swirl.  Again  I  have  heard  this  Man 
called  the  Will,  which  is  again  the  swirl-face  without 
the  whirl-face.  And  I  have  seen  the  Will  likened  to 
the  rudder  of  a  ship.  A  simile,  according  to  the  old 
logicians,  is  no  argument.  There  is,  unfortunately 
for  them,  no  other  kind  of  argument,  except  the 
thump  upon  the  table.  But  a  bad  simile  is  a  bad 
argument,  and  I  think  this  of  the  Will  and  rudder 
the  worst  simile  ever  used.  Only  a  landsman  could 
have  thought  of  it.  A  seaman  knows  that  as  soon 
as  the  Helmsman's  hand  is  taken  from  the  helm,  the 
rudder  is  the  most  strengthless  part  of  the  ship.  It 
is  not  even  a  part  of  the  ship.  It  is  something 
towed  behind. 

There  is  a  far  more  wonderful  word  than  Will, 
and  a  far  more  beautiful;  although  for  a  long  time 
many  good  men  have  been  at  work  making-believe 
that  it  is  a  very  ugly  word,  and  calling  it  all  manner 
of  hard  names.    I  mean  Self. 

In  dealing  with  this  word  I  seem  to  have  a  free 
hand,  for  the  last  word  of  philology  on  it  is — -*'  The 


Biology:  The  Elf  21 1 

origin  is  unknown."  When  I  look  into  it,  it  opens 
like  a  flower-bud,  revealing  undreamt-of  petals.  It 
must  behave  like  that,  because  it  is  the  seed  of 
words,  the  first  entry  in  the  real  lexicon. 

Let  us  not  think  of  word-lore  as  fixed,  nor  of 
words  as  dead  flowers  stuck  into  a  book.  Let  us 
not  think  of  even  their  shells  as  artificial  carpentry, 
like  the  false  coins  daily  issuing  from  the  Babu  mint, 
or  the  unheard-of  exercises  of  language-makers. 
Even  the  Roman  words  that  have  struck  true  roots 
into  our  northern  speech  did  so  because  they  found 
congenial  soil;  the  water  ran  where  there  were  chan- 
nels for  it;  the  marriages  were  between  far-off  kins- 
men. And  so  the  new  clothes  partly  followed  the 
old  fashions,  and  the  old  clothes  partly  followed  the 
new.     Let  us  thank  philology,  and  beware  of  it. 

Some  one  has  guessed  that  Self  is  shortened  from 
soul-elf.  Now  the  good  men  who  have  said  such 
hard  things  about  Self,  are  very  fond  of  Soul.  What 
then  is  Soul? 

The  learned  Latham  gives  me  the  old  spelling 
sazvel,  and  leaves  me  there,  with  "explanations" 
which  require  to  be  explained  by  soul.  I  find  the 
Dutch  write  it  ziel,  which  makes  me  think  of  zeal. 
But  this  philology  will  not  allow.  English  philology 
has  a  particular  spite  against  the  Dutch,  almost  as 
much  as  against  "  provincial "  English.  It  chooses 
rather  to  track  zeal  through  French  and  Latin  back 
to  the  Greek  zeo,  to  seethe  and  boil.  And  after  it 
has  taken  all  this  trouble,  it  next  proceeds  to  track 


212  The  New  Word 

soul  back  through  a  Gothic  form  of  sea  to  an  imag- 
inary Aryan  root  sn,  which  means  much  the  same 
thing.    So  that  the  Soul  is  an  empty  bubble  after  all. 

And  what  have  the  good  men  been  doing,  then, 
all  this  time,  in  honouring  the  Soul  above  the  Self. 
They  have  kept  the  bubble,  and  let  go  the  elf. 
What  a  materialistic  thing  to  do !  This  Soul  of 
theirs  is  barren  steam;  It  Is  not  life,  but  energy  of 
motion;  and  so  we  are  rather  steam-engines  than 
men.  Why  have  these  good  men  stunned  their 
minds  and  ours  with  such  an  ugly  word? 

The  word  Soul  is  an  ugly  word.  For  though  exact 
philology  may  be  wrong  as  usual,  and  soul  be  neither 
zeo  nor  suein,  but  rather  zoe,  the  strength  within 
the  beast,  and  not  the  strength  within  the  kettle,  yet 
the  Greeks  themselves  had  found  a  better  name  than 
that  for  the  Man  Inside.  They  named  him  psyche, 
the  breather,  and  on  their  tombs  they  drew  him  as 
a  butterfly  escaping  from  the  chrysalis. 

What  did  our  forefathers  name  him? 

Self  cannot  be  soul-elf.  That  S  is  far  more  likely 
to  be  the  same  S  that  we  find  in  the  Latin  se,  and 
at  the  end  of  English  words  like  his  and  yours — ^the 
sign  of  ownership.  If  that  Is  right,  the  Self  would 
be  the  Own-Elf,  and  oneself  another  way  of  writing 
one's  elf. 

Consider  this.  That  mathematical  strength-ball 
that  we  drew  so  carefully  was  all  the  while  an  Elf, 
hiding  In  scientific  language.  Our  forefathers  had 
better  taste  in  words  than  we  have.    That  litde  elf 


Biology:  The  Elf  213 

was  their  idea.  We  see  him  peeping  on  us,  and 
passing  out  of  sight,  between  the  pages  of  the 
child's  Bible — those  old  folk  tales  that  were  our 
Bible  once,  before  the  Roman  steam-roller  had  had 
its  way  over  the  Baltic  brain. 

The  fairy  word  goes  on  unfolding.  To  me  that 
elf  looks  very  much  like  life.  One's  Life,  I  hold  to 
be  the  best  interpretation  of  Self.  But  one  philol- 
ogist tells  me  that  "elf"  is  aelf,  or  half,  and  an- 
other that  "life"  is  a  remnant,  the  Icelandic  Ufa, 
what  is  left.  And  so  if  there  be  any  truth  in  lexi- 
cons, the  Inner  and  the  Outer  Strength  are  named 
by  these  old  words  one's  Own-Half  and  the  Other- 
Half' — the  two  Halves  of  the  All-Thing. 

If  that  be  so,  the  poor,  despised,  imprisoned  Bal- 
tic mind  was,  after  all,  more  subtle  than  the  Medi- 
terranean mind.  Perhaps,  during  that  long  time 
that  the  Mediterranean  mind  has  been  swaggering 
up  and  down  the  world,  ferule  in  hand,  dictating  to 
us  of  points  and  atoms,  universe  and  unit,  the  Baltic 
mind  has  been  secretly  whispering  to  itself — Half. 

Such  are  those  old,  prophetic  words.  Such  are 
the  jewels,  glowing  with  all  the  colours  of  the  rain- 
bow, which  we  have  flung  away  to  clutch  the  ultra- 
montane beads.  To  me  these  words  seem  flowers, 
which  have  been  snatched  from  children's  hands, 
and  trodden  underfoot,  but  which  have  seeded  in 
the  dust,  and  are  ready  to  spring  up  again,  and 
gladden  our  jaded  senses  with  somewhat  of  the 
freshness  of  the  foreworld. 


214  The  New  Word 

They  are  very  old.  We  do  not  know  How  old 
that  little  elf  Is.  He  is  older  than  Thor  and  Woden, 
older  than  Jupiter  and  Yahweh,  older,  it  may  be, 
than  the  Baltic  and  Mediterranean  seas,  as  old  as 
life  itself. 


II 


The  question  of  the  beginning  of  One's-Life  is 
the  question  whether  life  comes  from  death,  or 
death  from  life;  and  I  find  this  question  cannot  be 
answered  either  way  so  as  to  please  good  men. 

Down  to  about  three  hundred  years  ago,  every 
one,  good  and  bad  alike,  seems  to  have  thought  that 
dead  meat  could  turn  into  live  maggots  by  itself. 
Then  the  Florentine  doctor,  Redi,  showed  that  dead 
meat  did  not  turn  into  live  maggots  by  itself;  and 
he  did  so  very  easily,  by  putting  a  piece  of  gauze 
over  the  dead  meat,  and  thus  keeping  off  the  flies 
that  had  laid  the  eggs  that  had  turned  into  the  live 
maggots  in  the  meat.  This  was  not  Logic,  nor  Ab- 
solute Proof,  but  it  persuaded  most  people  that  dead 
meat  did  not  turn  into  live  maggots  by  itself. 

Now  by  doing  this  Redi  gave  great  pain  to  the 
good  men.  They  charged  him  with  having  limited 
the  power  of  the  Omnipotent.  The  words  seem  to 
unsay  themselves; — how  can  you  put  bounds  to  the 
strength  of  the  All-Strong? — but  that  is  what  the 
good  men  said  Redi  had  done  by  putting  a  piece  of 
gauze  between  the  flies  and  the  dead  meat. 


Biology:  The  Elf  215 

Next,  after  a  good  many  years,  some  other 
learners  thought  that  Redi  might  have  been  mis- 
taken; and  they  put  some  dead  hay  into  a  bottle, 
and  hoped  that  it  would  turn  into  live  mites  by  it- 
self. You  would  have  thought  that  the  good  men 
who  had  been  so  vexed  with  Redi  would  have  been 
very  pleased  with  these  doubters.  Not  at  all.  They 
were  even  more  angry  with  them  than  they  had 
been  with  Redi.  They  charged  them  with  trying  to 
dispense  with  the  power  of  Omnipotence.  Think 
of  that;  doing  without  the  strength  of  All  Strength  I 

Which  of  these  Andronican  crimes  shall  I  com- 
mit? 

I  think  it  will  be  easier  to  set  bounds  to  the 
Strength  Without  than  to  do  away  with  it  alto- 
gether. Indeed,  I  cannot  see  what  is  gained  by  be- 
stowing life  on  man  with  the  words  free-will,  and 
taking  it  away  again  with  the  word  omnipotence. 
How  can  there  be  All-Strength  and  some  more 
strength?  If  it  be  true  that  we  are  alive,  would  it 
not  be  using  better  words  to  say  that  the  Strength 
Without  has  partly  turned  into  the  Strength  Within, 
which  we  know  as  our  own  strength,  and  has  so  far 
set  bounds,  however  weak,  to  its  own  strength.  In 
that  old  story  of  creation  did  not  the  Creator 
breathe  his  own  Breath  into  the  Man? 

When  we  look  Into  the  question  between  Redi 
and  those  who  doubted  him,  we  find  very  naturally 
that  it  has  really  been,  not  whether  dead  hay  can 
turn  into  live  mites  by  itself,  but  whether  the  hay 


2i6  The  New  Word 

can  be  really  dead,  and  whether  the  bottles  can  be 
sealed  closely  and  carefully  enough  to  keep  out  those 
life-seeds  called  spores  which  swarm  in  the  air. 

If  I  were  to  see  hay  turning  into  live  mites  by 
itself,  I  should  not  call  the  hay  dead.  I  should  guess 
that  it  had  held  life-seeds  too  small  for  us  to  kill. 
And  I  might  go  on  to  guess  that  all  that  which  we 
name  "inorganic  Matter"  was  made  up  of  such 
life-seeds;  immeasurable  eddies  in  the  whirl-swirl 
that  are  still  hidden  beneath  the  skirts  of  sense. 

Instead  of  speaking,  as  we  now  speak,  of  the 
quick  and  the  dead,  it  seems  to  me  we  shall  soon 
have  to  speak  of  the  quicker  and  the  slower.  Is  not 
this  the  meaning,  and  is  not  this  the  re-writing  more 
carefully,  of  that  old  Rosicrucian  language  about  the 
sylphs  and  nymphs  and  gnomes  and  salamanders? 

When  we  ask  the  learned  for  the  beginning  of 
life  they  show  us  a  wonderful  little  creature  which 
they  name  in  their  bad  language  amoeba.  The 
amoeba  is  a  little  ball  of  quickstuff  which  rolls  along 
the  seafloor,  and  as  it  rolls  it  feeds  on  things  still 
smaller  than  itself.  And  the  way  it  feeds  is  this: 
as  soon  as  it  touches  what  it  is  going  to  feed  on,  it 
turns  inside  out  round  it.  And  the  amoeba's  death 
is  more  wonderful  than  its  life;  for  it  dies  by  part- 
ing in  twain,  so  that  it  is  not  really  death  which 
overtakes  it,  but  rather  birth.  The  English  name 
for  this  little  pioneer  of  Self  is  the  Changeling. 

Whence  did  the  Changeling  come?  Darwin  has 
taught  us  to  look  back  along  the  growth  of  life- 


Biology:  The  Elf  217 

shapes,  and  see  everywhere  the  branching  of  life. 
The  beast  life  does  not  grow  out  of  the  plant  life, 
both  branch  off  from  the  Changeling.  From  what 
did  the  Changeling  branch  off? 

Everywhere  as  we  look  round  us  we  see  life  cloth- 
ing itself  with  what  we  try  to  think  of  as  dead  Mat- 
ter, but  nowhere  do  we  see  the  dead  Matter  filling 
itself  with  life.  We  see  the  skin  wrought  around  the 
life-strength,  we  see  the  bark  and  rind,  we  see  the 
coral  and  the  ivory,  the  wool  without  and  the  bones 
within;  but  nowhere  do  we  see  life-strength  wrought 
by  what  we  call  the  elements.  Everywhere  the  cell 
makes  the  shell,  and  nowhere  does  the  shell  make 
the  cell. 

Is  not  the  cell  older  than  the  shell ;  and  what  we 
call  Life  older  than  what  we  call  Matter? — which 
is  indeed  the  Shell  of  Life. 

Whence  came  the  Cell  ?  It  may  be  older  than  we 
guess.  It  may  not  be  made  up  of  mud  and  water 
after  all,  any  more  than  gold  is  made  up  of  the  clay 
and  quartz  amongst  which  it  lies.  It  may  be  of  kin 
with  the  flame  in  the  bowels  of  the  earth,  and  with 
the  light  on  which  it  feeds,  and  by  which  it  grows. 
It  may  have  parted  from  the  sun  when  the  earth 
parted,  and  have  yet  its  flaming  kindred  in  the  burn- 
ing orb.  The  Changeling  may  have  been  once  a 
true  salamander,  that  has  fallen  from  Its  first  estate, 
and  forfeited  Its  fiery  shape. 


2i8  The  New  Word 


III 


The  story  of  the  elf  has  no  beginning.  Has  it 
an  end? 

Here  is  one  parting  of  the  ways  between  Mate- 
rialism and  Idealism.  The  Past  is  the  department 
of  the  first,  the  Future  the  department  of  the  sec- 
ond. One  is  looking  backward,  and  the  other  look- 
ing forward.  In  the  fullest  sense  of  the  words,  the 
Materialist  is  a  historian,  and  the  Idealist  a  prophet. 

Accordingly  one  of  the  tasks  which  idealists  have 
naturally  set  themselves  has  been  to  make  sure  that 
the  Life  Within  them  would  not  die. 

They  have  done  this  because  they  hoped  to  live 
for  ever.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  greatest  mind 
that  has  ever  worked  on  behalf  of  men,  the  mind  of 
the  Buddha,  was  bent  upon  the  contrary  task  of 
making  sure  that  the  Life  Within  could  pass  away 
into  the  Life  Without. 

The  language  of  the  Buddha  is  the  language  of 
his  age  and  country,  which  is  to  say  that  it  sounds 
false  to  us.  But  in  that  language  he  has  reached 
the  greatest  heights  ever  reached  by  one  man's  rea- 
son. He  has  reached  to  the  nature  of  life,  the  false- 
hood of  matter,  the  balance  of  action  and  reaction. 
His  gospel  is  the  gospel  of  those  who  believe  in 
immortality,  and  dread  it.  To  them  he  has  shown 
the  Way  Out  of  Eternal  Life.     He  has  expounded 


Biology:  The  Elf  219 

the  great  law  of  metastrophe  In  terms  of  good  and 
evil,  or  of  pleasure  and  pain,  pain  the  reaction  of 
pleasure,  and  pleasure  the  reaction  of  pain.  He 
has  taught  that  these  twins  are  the  Atom  of  life, 
and  that  one  cannot  be  destroyed  without  the  other, 
nor  without  destroying  life  Itself.  He  has  put 
before  men  the  choice  between  Life  and  Nothing, 
and  Invited  them  to  choose  Nothing. 

I  think  that  no  tw^o  men  have  ever  had  wholly  the 
same  religion,  and  I  am  sure  that  no  two  men  ought 
to.  For  such  as  think  they  want  to  leave  off  living, 
no  better  gospel  than  Buddhism  Is  ever  likely  to  be 
preached.     But  It  is  not  Idealism.     It  is  Nihilism. 

The  verlhood  or  falsehood  of  this  gospel  Is  beside 
the  question.  For  if  Idealism  be  the  science  of  Life, 
learning  by  emotion,  that  cannot  be  Idealism  which 
preaches  the  passing  away  of  emotion,  and  the 
passing  away  from  Life. 

Idealism,  as  I  have  said,  has  set  itself  instinctively 
to  make  sure  of  Life.  Those  idealists  who  have 
failed  In  their  task,  have  failed  because  they  were 
trying  to  learn  from  words  Instead  of  from  the  emo- 
tions expressed  by  the  words.  They  hoped  to  live, 
but  did  not  see  that  that  hope  was  their  best  assur- 
ance. If  emotion  we  call  hope  be  true,  and  sense 
be  true,  the  tales  of  Hope  and  Sense  will  agree,  as 
they  do  in  the  story  of  the  elf.  You  hope  to  live 
for  ever,  you  see  that  you  have  lived  from  ever; 
what  other  assurance  do  you  need  ? — Has  not  this 
been  better  said  already  by  the  Swedish  poet? — 


220  The  New  Word 

"  Every  soul  that  longs  and  glows 
Toward  things  that  true  and  noble  be, 

Bears  within  its  depth,  and  knows. 
Assurance  of  eternity." 

That  is  what  rightly  ought  to  be  called  Idealism  ; 
and  if  we  are  forbidden  to  call  it  Science,  let  us  call 
it  Imagination  ;  not  talking  positively  when  it  talks 
about  deep  things  ;  not  tapping  on  the  walls  of  the 
All-Thing  with  a  hammer,  and  pronouncing  them 
hollow  ;  but  listening  at  the  chinks,  with  finger  on 
lip,  for  the  murmur  of  the  Beyond.  Imagination  is 
the  ragamuffin  called  in  by  Science  to  sweep  up  its 
breakages.  Imagination  is  the  boy  upon  the  steps, 
who  thought  that  he  had  found  the  seed-pearl 
dropped  by  the  archbishop.  The  boy  is  always 
there,  in  every  age,  outside  the  temple.  He  does 
not  go  into  temples,  whether  in  Rome  or  in  Jerusa- 
lem. He  stays  out  on  the  steps,  in  the  sunshine, 
looking  for  pearls  amongst  the  dust.  Perhaps  he 
does  not  really  find  them.  Perhaps  it  is  the  sun- 
shine that  he  sees. 

He  is  reverent  towards  the  archbishops  while  they 
are  listening  to  God.  When  they  talk  back,  he  does 
not  always  join  in  the  responses.  He  thinks  his  own 
thoughts,  and  he  utters  them  in  his  own  words. 
That  is  why,  when  the  archbishops  of  to-day,  mut- 
tering their  Mediterranean  incantations,  come  to  the 
heart  of  their  mystery,  and  recite, — Energy  of  Mo- 
tion, the  boy  whispers  back, — The  Elf  Inside. 


Biology:  The  Elf  22 1 

IV 

And  now  if  we  should  widen  this  definition  of  life 
so  as  to  take  in,  not  only  oneself,  but  other  selves, 
and  write  it  as  the  story  of  a  Thousand  Elves  and 
One  Elf  ;  if  we  should  speak  of  these  little  lives  as 
saying  nay  to  the  Yea  of  that  Great  Life,  within 
which  they  move  and  have  their  being  ;  in  that  case 
our  language  about  the  All-Thing  will  echo  the  lan- 
guage of  Materialism  about  the  Atom,  and  the 
Least  that  we  have  knowledge  of  will  be  a  likeness 
of  the  Most.  Yet  it  will  not  be  the  whole  truth 
about  Everything,  any  more  than  Thomson's  pretty 
Chinese  toy  is  the  whole  truth  about  Nothing. 

The  good  men  whom  I  am  fighting  have  some- 
time busied  themselves  with  what  they  call  the  prob- 
lem of  the  origin  of  Evil.  For  me  there  is  no  such 
problem,  because  there  is  no  such  Evil  as  theirs. 
Evil  for  me  means  what  I  dislike,  and  it  means 
nothing  more.  My  only  problem  is  how  to  over- 
come evil  without  greater  evil,  and  I  find  that  to 
be  problem  enough.  In  the  meantime  I  am  sure 
that  unless  I  disliked  some  things  I  could  not  like 
other  things,  and  I  could  not  be  alive.  If  you  take 
away  resistance,  you  take  away  existence.  I  agree 
with  the  Buddha  in  his  reasoning,  albeit  not  in  his 
hope. 

Yet  if  I  were  to  answer  these  good  men  in  their 
own  language — which  in  me  would  be  blasphemous 
language,  if  I  were  tempted  into  speaking  of  the 


222  The  New  Word 

Man  Outside  In  terms  of  the  Man  Inside,  I  might 
say  to  them  that  the  Great  Life  could  not  gain  an 
outline  except  In  battle  ;  that  the  Man  Outside 
could  not  know  himself  except  by  turning  one  half 
of  his  strength  against  the  other  half  ;  that  what  I 
name  Life  and  they  name  Universe  is  One  Strength 
turning  into  two,  by  turning  inside  out,  and  so,  that 
the  Twin  Wrestlers  of  the  whlrl-swIrl  are  both 
God. 

I  think  it  never  wise  to  hold  such  language  as  If 
it  were  aught  other  than  a  parable.  Nor  do  I  deem 
it  the  best  parable.  I  am  not  sure  of  other  lives 
than  mine.  I  am  sure  of  two  strengths,  my  own 
strength  and  the  Strength  Inclosing  mine;  and  from 
my  point  of  view  these  other  lives  about  me,  with 
the  lives  of  the  good  men  whom  I  am  fighting,  are 
part  of  that  Outer  Strength.  So  that  I  am  myself 
the  other  wrestler,  called  upon  to  strive  with  the 
Great  Wrestler,  and  up  to  a  certain  measure  able 
to  prevail  ;  as  we  may  see  a  tiny  eddy  on  the  edge  of 
a  vast  whirl-pool,  going  the  other  way. 

He  who  has  watched  the  iron  crumbs  drawn  into 
patterns  by  the  magnet  ;  or  who  in  the  frostwork 
on  the  window  pane  has  apprehended  the  unknown 
beauty  of  the  crystal's  law,  seems  to  me  to  have  an 
idea  more  wholesome  to  our  frail  imaginings  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Mystery  of  Life.  To  me  that 
seems  the  better  parable. 

If  we  discern  discord  where  we  ought  to  discern 
harmony,  let  us  believe  the  fault  Is  In  our  ears  and 


Biology:  The  Elf  223 

not  in  the  Musician;  in  our  imperfect  execution  of 
our  own  parts,  and  not  in  the  mind  of  the  Com- 
poser. Not  for  that  must  we  withhold  our  voices. 
Though  they  sound  harsh  in  one  ear,  they  shall  sound 
sweet  In  another.  Not  for  that  must  we  lie  down 
to  sleep  with  the  comfortable  assurance  that  what- 
ever Is,  is  right.  There  is  no  is.  There  is  no 
present  tense  In  the  metastrophe  of  time.  The 
Present  Is  the  point  at  which  the  Future  turns  into 
the  Past.  Whatever  is  has  been  right,  and  will  be 
wrong. 

Let  us  learn  more  and  more  to  understand  the 
harmony,  and  fit  our  execution  to  It,  but  in  the 
meanwhile  let  us  wait  on  the  Conductor.  It  is  not 
for  one  string  of  the  harpsichord  to  refuse  to  tremble 
when  it  is  struck,  lest  it  should  mar  the  music  of  the 
others.  It  is  not  for  the  least  fifer  in  the  crowded 
orchestra  to  hold  his  breath  when  the  Conductor 
beckons  to  him,  nor  to  quarrel  with  his  blotted  score 
because  it  bids  him  sound  too  high  or  low  a  note. 
All  that  Is  the  Composer's  business,  and  he  conducts 
his  Opera,  The  Score  was  written,  he  took  the 
Baton  into  his  hand,  or  ever  the  foundations  of  the 
earth  were  laid,  and  all  the  morning  stars  sang  to- 
gether. 

Are  we  not  better  off  already  than  the  Insect  that 
toils  a  hundred  fathoms  deep  beneath  the  wave  to 
build  the  isle  that  it  shall  never  see?  We  at  least 
catch  a  prophetic  glimpse  of  sunlight,  and  overhear 
the  rustling  of  the  palms. 


SIXTEENTH  HEAD 


THE  PAINTED  WINDOW 

Talk  about  God. — i.  ^Applied  Theology. — 2.  Legal 
Definition  of  God. — 3.  The  Birth  of  Mind. — 4.  The 
Story  of  God, — 5.  ^Bad  Language  about  Gad. — 6.  The 
Idol. 

TDEALISTIC  science  measures  from  the  Strength 
*'■  Within  towards  the  Strength  Without.  But  it  is 
still  measuring  relations.  Like  Materialistic  sci- 
ence, it  can  only  measure  strength  by  measuring  the 
ways  of  strength. 

The  attempt  to  measure  the  Inner  Strength  by 
itself  is  that  science  so  unwittingly  christened  by 
Andronikos  of  Rhodes,  which  is  not  science  but  only 
talk. 

The  attempt  to  measure  the  Over  Strength  by 
itself  is  fittingly  named  Talk  about  God, — the  Med- 
iterranean word  is  Theology. 

It  is  significant  that  the  best  talker  about  men 
who  ever  lived,  never  talked  about  God.  Of  K'ung 
the  Master,  whom  the  Babus  name  Confucius,  it  is 
recorded  that  one  of  the  subjects  which  he  never 
would  discuss  with  his  followers  was  the  appoint- 
ments of  Heaven.  Once,  when  he  was  asked  con- 
cerning our  duty  towards  the  spirits,  he  refused  to 
answer,  saying,  "  Let  us  first  learn  our  duty  towards 
men;  then  it  will  be  time  enough  to  talk  about  our 

224 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       225 

duty  towards  the  spirits."  Only  on  one  occasion  we 
are  told,  when  he  was  in  danger  in  KVang,  he  told 
his  followers, — "  If  Heaven  has  lodged  the  cause  of 
Truth  in  my  person,  what  can  the  people  of  K'wang 
do  to  me  ?  " 

The  best  talkers  about  God  who  have  ever  lived 
were  the  Hindus.  And  after  talking  for  a  long 
time,  and  using  very  many  words,  they  reached  this 
conclusion,  that  the  only  word  which  safely  could  be 
used  about  God  was  No: — No.  That  was  the  end 
of  their  talk  about  God  ;  so  that  they  left  off  where 
K'ung  the  Master  had  begun. 


The  worst  talkers  about  God  who  have  ever  lived, 
because  the  most  positive  and  circumstantial  talkers, 
were  the  Catholics.  Their  ablest  talker,  one  of  the 
ablest  talkers  I  have  heard  of,  was  a  Mediterranean 
man  named  Thomas  Aquinas,  who  wrote  a  book 
called  the  Sum  of  Theology,  or  the  Height  of  Talk 
about  God.  His  book  stands  out  as  the  highwater- 
mark  of  the  human  mind  in  the  Dark  Ages.  It  is 
theology  at  its  best,  or  worst. 

Aquinas  was  by  no  means  a  man  of  weak  or  nar- 
row mind.  Within  the  revolving  cage  of  Androni- 
can  words  there  has  toiled  no  braver  nor  truer- 
minded  squirrel.  That  High  Talk  of  his  sounded 
so  like  verihood  that  to  many  of  those  who  listened 


226  The  New  Word 

to  it  Aquinas  seemed  to  be  an  atheist,  while  to 
others  he  seemed  to  be  a  saint.  With  truer  instinct 
than  Kant,  and  therefore  with  better  reason,  he 
wished  to  set  out  from  the  two  words  God  and  the 
Soul.  But  for  Aquinas  these  words  were  fixed 
words,  fixed  by  the  authority,  or  as  the  Babu  hath  it, 
the  ipse  dixit,  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  and  thus  his 
eyes  were  shut  to  the  metastrophe  between  them. 
So  this  great  sleep-walker  never  did  set  out,  he  only 
walked  In  his  sleep,  but  never  really  left  his  start- 
ing-point. Such  questions  as  came  before  his  mind 
he  examined  truthfully,  setting  out  the  arguments 
on  both  sides,  but  always  giving  judgment  In  the 
words  of  the  Church.  So  we  may  see  the  mes- 
merised subject  exercising  his  reason  freely  where 
it  has  been  left  free  ;  but  as  soon  as  he  is  brought 
up  by  the  suggestion  of  the  mesmerist,  his  mind 
ceases  to  work,  and  he  repeats  the  mesmerist's  will. 

The  Churchmen  had  no  doubt  that  Aquinas  was 
a  saint.  They  applied  a  simple  test,  and  found  that, 
however  impartial  might  be  the  summing  up,  the 
verdict  was  always  in  their  favour. 

To-day  this  book,  the  greatest  book  of  Catholic 
Theology,  ranks  as  a  curiosity  rather  than  as  litera- 
ture. And  that  is  not  because,  like  the  book  of 
Copernicus,  it  has  done  its  work,  but  because  no 
one  any  longer  hopes  that  it  can  do  any  work.  It 
has  no  going  strength.  It  is  like  a  disused  incanta- 
tion, which  the  spirit  has  left  off  obeying.  The  spell 
is  still  there,  but  the  spirit  has  fled. 


Theology:  The  Painted  Windoiv       227 

The  failure  of  such  a  theologian  is  the  failure  of 
theology.  If  his  Talk  about  God  be  not  worth 
reading,  no  such  Talk  about  God  is  likely  to  be 
worth  reading.  For  my  part,  whenever  I  have 
tried  to  read  any  of  this  Talk,  I  have  been  brought 
up  by  sayings  like  these  :  "  God  is  almighty  ;  God 
created  the  world  ;  God  is  wholly  good  ;  the  world 
is  mostly  evil."  And  that  kind  of  talk  has  not 
helped  me  to  know  anything  about  God.  The 
words  have  seemed  to  me  to  unsay  each  other. 
They  have  gone  round  and  round  me,  but  they 
have  not  taken  me  an  inch  nearer  to  God. 

Let  us  see  how  this  Talk  about  God  works  out  in 
practice.    Here  is  a  specimen  of  Applied  Theology. 

Antonio  Perez,  the  disgraced  minister  of  Philip  II, 
was  seized  by  the  Holy  Inquisition,  on  a  charge  of 
heresy,  for  having  threatened  to  cut  off  God's  nose. 
The  holy  inquisitors  did  not  proceed  against  Perez 
for  the  threat,  but  for  the  anthropomorphism.  The 
heresy  lay  in  saying  that  God  has  a  nose,  not  in 
railing  against  God.  In  the  view  of  the  Holy  Office 
it  was  worse  to  think  falsely  about  God  than  to  be 
angry  with  God.  But  now,  let  us  look  into  this. 
Antonio  Perez  would  not  have  railed  against  God 
unless  he  had  thought  God  was  going  to  treat  him 
badly.  So  that  in  uttering  his  threat  he  was  denying 
the  goodness  of  God.  Again,  in  threatening  to 
injure  God,  he  was  denying  God's  omnipotence. 
Therefore  in  the  view  of  the  inquisitors  it  was 
worse  to  think  falsely  about  God's  shape  than  about 


228  The  New  Word 

God's  Character.  To  use  their  own  language,  they 
were  exalting  the  species  above  the  essence.  The 
curious  thing  is  that  all  this  while  their  own  Book 
told  them  that  God  had  made  man  in  his  own 
image.  However,  as  we  know  from  history,  the 
inquisitors  were  thinking  really,  not  about  God,  but 
about  Philip  II,  who  was  using  them  as  the  minis- 
ters of  his  revenge  on  Perez.  The  talk  about  God 
was  only  a  blind  ;  perhaps  that  also  was  a  kind  of 
heresy. 

It  does  not  look  as  though  Andronlcan  language 
about  God  were  ever  likely  to  be  of  material  ben- 
efit to  mankind. 


II 


By  way  of  contrast,  let  us  look  at  another  kind  of 
talk  about  God,  a  bit  of  rule-of-thumb  theology.  It 
happens  that  there  Is  to  be  found  In  English  law- 
books a  working  definition  of  God,  that  is  to  say,  a 
definition  good  enough  to  dispose  of  a  sum  of  money. 
It  was  made  in  this  way. 

Merchants  and  shipowners  have  a  form  of  agree- 
ment which  they  call  a  charter-party.  In  this  agree- 
ment they  say  that  the  shipowner  Is  to  carry  the 
cargo  safely,  but  that  he  Is  not  to  be  liable  for  losses 
brought  about  by,  among  other  causes,  "  the  act  of 
God."  It  was  not  the  lawyers  who  first  wrote 
those  curious,  medieval  words  ;  It  was  the  ship- 
owners and  merchants.     But  of  course    they    very 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       229 

soon  quarrelled  over  their  meaning,  and  so  they 
came  to  the  lawyers,  and  said — "Tell  us  what  we 
mean  by  our  words." 

It  is  noteworthy  that  they  did  not  go  to  the  theo- 
logians. They  did  not  turn  to  the  pages  of  that 
famous  Sum  of  Theology,  to  ascertain  the  meaning 
of  the  words  "Act  of  God."  The  theologians  had 
been  talking  about  God,  and  trying  to  explain  God, 
for  hundreds  and  hundreds  of  years  ;  and  yet  when 
these  plain,  business  men  wanted  an  answer  to  their 
question,  it  never  struck  them  that  the  theologians 
could  be  of  the  least  use  to  them.  You  see  the 
reason.  There  was  a  sum  of  money  at  stake  ;  and 
so  they  wanted  a  real  answer,  an  answer  that  would 
settle  who  was  to  pay  for  the  lost  cargo;  they  did 
not  want  Mediterranean  words  that  went  round  and 
round. 

So  they  went  to  the  lawyers.  And  the  answer  ol 
the  lawyers  was  a  very  practical  one.  They  said 
that  God  sent  the  big  storms,  but  not  the  little 
ones. 

To  the  logical  and  theological  mind  that  answer 
will  sound  very  foolish.  B'ut  let  us  look  into  it.  The 
lawyers  were  not  thinking  about  God,  really,  any 
more  than  the  inquisitors  had  been;  they  were  think- 
ing about  who  was  to  pay  the  sum  of  money.  They 
had  to  find  the  strength  underlying  the  words,  and 
they  were  wise  enough  to  look  for  It  in  the  minds 
of  the  shipowners  and  merchants.  As  soon  as  they 
did  that  they  saw  that  what  the  words  meant  was 


230  The  New  PVord 

nothing  more  than  that  the  shipowner  must  do  his 
utmost  to  carry  the  cargo  safely.  If  it  was  lost  in 
some  little  storm,  when  the  shipowner's  care  might 
have  saved  it,  then  he  was  to  pay,  because  he  had 
not  done  his  utmost;  if  it  was  lost  in  some  great 
storm,  after  the  shipowner  had  done  his  utmost,  then 
he  was  not  to  pay.  It  came  to  this,  that  there 
were  two  strengths,  as  it  were,  working  against  one 
another,  the  strength  of  the  shipowner  and  the 
Strength  Outside  ;  and  there  was  a  measure  up  to 
which  the  strength  of  the  shipowner  could  prevail. 
— The  balance  of  the  Strength  Outside  over  the 
shipowner's  strength  was  God. 

What  can  the  Sum  of  Theology  add  to  that  ? 

What  can  be  added  to  that  by  all  who  have  ever 
reasoned — 

"  In  endless  mazes  lost, 
Of  providence,   fore-knowledge,  will  and   fate?" 

the  task  which  Milton,  the  poet  in  him  triumphing 
over  the  theologian,  has  given  to  the  damned  spirits 
In  Hell. 

What  can  be  added  to  it  by  all  those  poor,  tired, 
stupid,  angry  folks  who  are  always  trying  to  apolo- 
gise for  God,  to  vindicate  the  ways  of  God  to  man, 
to  explain  to  us  that  God  Is  not  so  bad  as  he 
seems  ? 

Most  of  their  trouble  Is  self-made.  They  look 
around  them  and  deem  what  they  see  to  be  Evil, 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       231 

and  then  they  begin  to  find  excuses  for  God.  Yet 
all  the  time  they  are  not  agreed  among  themselves 
as  to  what  is  evil.  One  says  that  pain  is  an  evil, 
another  that  pleasure  is  an  evil  ;  one  tells  us  that 
labour  is  the  primal  curse,  another  that  idleness  is 
a  yet  greater  curse.  One  or  another  think  that  mar- 
riage, or  that  celibacy,  or  that  money-making,  or 
that  losing  money  or  that  drinking  wine,  or  that 
eating  meat,  or  knowledge,  or  ignorance,  or  not 
going  to  church,  or  going  to  the  rival  church,  Is  evil; 
and  so  they  set  to  work  to  excuse  God  for  not  being 
more  like  themselves.  Each  of  them  is  doing  much 
what  the  Aragonese  inquisitors  were  doing,  making 
God  a  stalking-horse.  When  they  ought  to  say  "  I,'* 
they  say  "  God."  When  they  ought  to  say,  "  I 
hate  this  or  that,  and  therefore  I  will  punish  my 
neighbours  for  doing  it,"  they  say,  *'  God  hates." 

The  talk  about  God  ends,  as  we  see,  m  theological 
hatred.  Whenever  in  its  history  the  Ithuriel  spear 
of  any  truth-seeker  has  touched  it,  Theology  has 
been  revealed  in  its  true  shape.  And  it  is  a  Fiery 
Shape  indeed. 


Ill 


In  these  latter  days  a  branch  of  learning  has 
sprung  up  amongst  us,  almost  unawares,  and  is 
growing  as  fast  as  theology  is  decaying.  It  was  at 
first  called  folk-lore  ;  but  as  soon  as  learned  men 
noticed  it,  they  felt  that  they  could  only  know  it  b)^ 


232  The  New  Word 

a  learned  name,  and  they  christened  It  Anthropol- 
ogy, which  is  to  say,  Talk  about  Man.  Now  this 
science  tells  us  the  ways  in  which  man  has  talked 
about  God.  It  is  the  history  of  Theology  that 
the  learned  men  have  somehow  named  Anthropol- 
ogy- 

In  reading  the  painful  gibberish  which  good  men 
are  not  afraid  to  write  about  their  God,  we  some- 
times come  on  sayings  of  this  kind  : — All  savages 
have  a  belief  in  God;  therefore  there  is  such  a 
person  as  God. — And  over  against  them  we  come 
on  other  sayings  of  this  kind  : — No  savages  have  a 
belief  in  God  ;  therefore  the  book  which  tells  us  that 
there  is  such  a  person  must  have  been  written  by 
God. 

We  need  not  ask  which  of  these  sayings  makes 
the  greater  nonsense,  because  of  course  we  learn 
from  folk-lore  what  we  have  already  learned  from 
word-lore,  that  no  one  has  ever  lived  without  being 
aware  of  the  Outer-Strength,  as  well  as  of  the  Inner. 
There  were  no  Bishop  Berkeleys  among  the  early 
men,  whose  thought  we  partly  learn  from  their  lan- 
guage. No  one  who  ever  felt  hot  and  cold  by 
turns  believed  himself  to  be  alone  in  Everything. 
From  that  we  begin;  the  history  starts  there. 

Everywhere,  as  far  back  as  we  can  go,  we  find 
men  in  communication  with  the  Strength  Outside, 
measuring  it  by  measuring  themselves  against  it, 
listening  to  it,  talking  to  it,  talking  about  it,  not 
only  in  words,  but  in  songs  and  dances,  in  signs  and 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       233 

symbols,  in  all  the  languages  In  which  they  talked 
with  one  another.  And  in  their  language  we 
read  the  growth  of  their  belief  ;  and  see  it  is  no 
other  than  the  natural  growth  of  mind,  or  wake- 
fulness, or  consciousness,  or  by  whatever  name  it 
may  be  called. 

Because  the  story  is  a  double  story,  the  story  of 
a  double  understanding.  Man's  knowledge  of  the 
Inner  and  the  Outer  Strengths  kept  pace  together.  As 
we  have  seen,  he  could  not  learn  of  one  without  the 
other,  because  he  had  to  measure  one  by  the  other. 
Mind  is  Matter.  It  is  the  meeting  place  of  these 
two  strengths.  The  seat  of  Mind  is,  verily  speaking, 
in  the  skin;  the  brain  itself  is  a  fold  of  skin-stuff 
caught  between  the  bone-stuff,  by  the  turning  inside 
out  of  the  life-seed  while  it  is  yet  in  the  womb.  And 
so  the  story  of  the  mind  is  the  story  of  the  slow 
awakening  of  the  Self,  from  what  seems  to  our 
scant  measures  the  whole  sleep  of  the  lower  life, 
upward  through  the  dream-like  instinct  of  the  beast, 
to  the  distincter  sight  and  carefuller  reckoning  of 
man. 

It  is  the  Life  Within  being  awakened  by  the  Life 
Without. 


IV 


In  books  not  much  less  painful  to  read  than  the 
good  men's  books,  though  written  by  much  brighter 
men,  we  come  on    these    strange    thoughts  : — The 


234  The  New  Word 

savage's  belief  in  God  is  drawn  from  his  belief  in 
ghosts;  and  as  there  are  no  ghosts,  so  there  is  no 
God.  And  again  : — One  savage  had  no  pronoun 
save  he,  and  therefore  he  called  the  sun  He  ;  and 
therefore  another  savage,  who  overheard  the  first 
one,  believed  the  sun  was  a  He. 

Now  our  forefathers  were  not  out  of  their  senses, 
nor  out  of  their  minds.  Their  senses  were  keener 
than  ours,  and  their  minds  less  keen.  The  mind 
was  less  keen  because  the  senses  were  more  keen  ; 
the  counting-house  in  the  brain  kept  too  many  books; 
it  reckoned  in  sounds  and  scents  and  tastes,  and 
other  forgotten  notations  which  we  have  dropped. 
Our  mind  works  better  because  it  tends  to  use  only 
one  notation,  that  of  sight.  But  in  dropping  the 
other  notations  we  have  partly  dropped  the  knowl- 
edge they  expressed.  The  early  mind  was  more 
round  than  ours.  What  we  have  gained  in  clear- 
ness we  have  lost  in  verihood. 

The  early  language  has  been  scrawled  over  by 
later  generations,  much  as  the  child's  language  is 
scrawled  over  by  the  schoolmasters,  and  the  wild 
man's  of  to-day  by  the  missionaries  of  to-day.  Yet 
on  the  whole  we  can  make  sense  of  it  ;  and  it  comes 
to  this,  that  our  forefathers  were  doing  what  we 
are  still  doing,  thinking  of  other  strength  in  terms 
of  their  own  strength,  and  figuring  it  as  a  Man  Out- 
side. 

They  did  this  more  openly  than  we  do  It.  They 
treated  the    Man  Outside    as   one    of   themselves. 


THeology:  The  Painted  Window       235 

When  they  wanted  to  bribe  him  they  offered  the 
bribe  frankly  ;  and  when  they  were  angry  with  him, 
they  punished  him  ;  and  though  they  were  often 
afraid  of  him,  they  were  often  not  afraid  to  fight 
him;  and  If,  like  us,  they  sometimes  tried  to  hood- 
wink him,  they  did  not,  like  us,  try  to  hoodwink 
themselves  at  the  same  time. 

Man  did  not  begin  by  saying  to  himself  that  there 
was  another  man  In  the  stones  and  trees  and  stars 
he  coaxed  or  threatened,  any  more  than  the  child 
who  strikes  his  head  against  a  table  says  to  him- 
self that  there  is  another  child  in  the  table.  He 
cries  out  because  he  is  hurt,  and  he  beats  the  table 
because  he  is  angry  with  it.  Feeling  comes  before 
thought,  and  emotion  before  explanation. 

The  early  man,  we  see,  could  not  find  the  Man 
Outside,  till  he  had  found  the  Man  Inside.  He  was 
in  his  way  a  Darwinian;  he  recognised  the  beasts 
as  his  kinsmen,  and  some  of  them  as  greater  than 
himself.  Thus  for  a  long  time  he  seems  to  have 
figured  the  unknown  strength  outside  as  beast 
strength.  He  talks  to  the  Kangaroo  In  the  moon, 
and  to  the  Crocodile  In  the  river,  and  to  the 
Dragon  in  the  sun.  To  this  day  the  Elder  Gods, 
who  have  fallen  from  Heaven,  retain  the  mark  of 
the  Beast  Outside  in  tail  and  pointed  ears  and 
cloven  hoof. 

By  slow  degrees,  as  man  went  on  measuring  his 
own  life  against  the  life  outside,  both  became  more 
distinct  to  him.    He  raised  himself,  partly  emerging 


236  The  New  Word 

from  the  beast,  as  in  the  old  Assyrian  sculptures 
we  see  the  man's  head  emerging  from  the  body  of 
the  bull.  The  Sphynx  Is  his  prophecy  of  evolution. 
The  Assyrian  bull  Is  a  yet  loftier  prophecy.  For  on 
Its  shoulders  are  wings,  and  In  our  later  art  the 
wings  have  lifted  up  the  face,  and  carried  It  away 
from  the  brute's  body,  and  the  kharah  has  become 
the  cherub. 

Dreaming  and  guessing,  hoping  and  measuring, 
man  climbed  upward  by  such  ladders  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  everlasting  Life.  Doubtless  the  ghost 
guided  him  towards  the  great  interpretation.  Was 
it  not,  too,  a  magic  letter  In  the  mysterious  hand- 
writing of  the  Man  Outside?  And  so  at  length 
the  words  become  clear  and  beautiful  for  us.  The 
man  finds  himself  In  the  marble.  The  woman  sees 
herself  In  the  well.  There  is  a  Man  In  the  sun,  and 
'  a  Woman  In  the  moon. 

All  this  was  not  a  nightmare  ;  It  was  an  awaken- 
ing. Superstition  passes  Into  science.  The  Woman 
in  the  moon  sways  the  great  tides  of  the  sea,  and 
the  more  secret  tides  in  man's  own  blood,  and 
brings  the  child  to  birth  at  the  appointed  time. 
The  Man  in  the  sun,  most  wonderful  of  all  these 
Men,  goes  round  the  world  a  conqueror,  driving  the 
four  Seasons  in  his  yoke,  and  bringing  seed  time  and 
harvest. 

Had  they  no  voices,  these  Men  Outside  ?  They 
had  voices  ;  there  were  Idealists  In  those  days  inter- 
preting the  ways  of  Heaven  by  the  heart  of  man. 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       237 

Did  not  that  Bright  One  in  the  sun  say  by  his  proph- 
ets in  Egypt  and  Syria  and  Asia  and  Greece: — 
"What,  are  ye  anointing  a  man  at  Easter,  and  slay- 
ing him,  and  burying  him  in  your  cornfields,  that  his 
life  may  give  life  to  the  seed,  and  his  flesh  be  your 
bread  !  Ye  know  not  what  you  do.  It  is  I  who 
give  life  to  the  seed,  I  who  give  you  your  daily 
bread.  Cease  your  cruel  rites,  for  I  am  a  merciful 
God,  delighting  not  in  the  death  of  a  sinner." — 
Real  Prophets,  we  may  learn  from  the  legends  of 
Linus  and  Atys  and  Adonis,  a  real  Herakles,  whether 
by  that  name  or  any  other,  went  round  the  Mediter- 
ranean coasts,  preaching  the  Gospel  of  the  Sun,  and 
snatching  the  victim  from  the  cross. 


That  old  Talk  about  the  Gods,  which  is  called 
mythology,  is  confused  in  many  ways,  partly  because 
all  language  is  confused,  partly  because  it  is  a  layer 
of  many  languages.  When  the  talkers  no  longer 
used  the  beast  as  an  idol,  they  used  it  as  a  symbol, 
in  short  a  word  ;  when  they  no  longer  slew  the  real 
Christ  at  Easter,  they  named  the  sun  at  Easter, 
Christ.  Their  language  is  tangled  and  twisted  be- 
yond our  power  wholly  to  unravel,  because  it  was 
beyond  their  power  ;  because  it  began  as  a  tangle, 
when  man's  mind  was  still  a  blur,  and  he  saw  men 
as  trees  walking,  and  trees  as  men  standing  still. — 


238  The  New  Word 

How  hard  the  old  cloistered  scholarship,  to  which 
the  Nobels  of  a  bygone  age  gave  their  endowments, 
has  tolled  to  understand  the  word  glaukopis,  given 
to  the  goddess  Athene.  Did  It  mean  blue-eyed,  or 
gray-eyed,  or — by  the  aid  of  Sanskrit — merely 
glare-eyed  ?  And  all  the  time  they  had  not  only  the 
word  glaux  staring  them  In  the  face,  as  the  Athenian 
name  for  owl,  and  the  name  of  ox-eyed  Hera  to 
guide  them,  but  they  had  the  owl  Itself  cut  at  the 
foot  of  every  statue  of  Athene,  and  stamped  on 
every  coin  of  Athens,  to  tell  them  that  she  was 
the  owl-eyed  goddess,  the  lightning  that  blinks  like 
an  owl.  For  what  Is  characteristic  of  the  owl's 
eyes  Is  not  that  they  glare,  but  that  they  suddenly 
leave  off  glaring,  like  lighthouses  whose  light  Is  shut 
off.  We  may  see  the  shutter  of  the  lightning  In 
that  mask  that  overhangs  Athene's  brow,  and  hear 
Its  click  In  the  word  glaiikos.  And  the  leafage  of 
the  olive,  whose  writhen  trunk  bears,  as  it  were,  the 
lightning's  brand,  does  not  glare,  but  glitters,  the 
pale  under  face  of  the  leaves  alternating  with  the 
dark  upper  face,  and  so  the  olive  is  Athene's  tree, 
and  Is  called  glaukos.  Why  need  we  carry  owls  to 
Oxford  ? 

Much  of  this  olden  language  Is  with  us  still.  It 
is  bad  language,  not  because  it  was  always  bad, 
like  theology,  but  because  it  is  out  of  date,  and  we 
repeat  It  without  understanding  It,  like  the  Latin- 
school  boys,  and  their  Oxford  schoolmasters. 
There  Is  another  Mediterranean  building,  standing 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       239 

beside  the  school  and  proudly  looking  down  on  it, 
Inside  which  grown  men  and  women  are  saying  what 
sounds  to  me  like  Hie  haec  hoc.  They  are  saying 
it  to  the  Man  Outside,  and  hoping  it  will  sound  bet- 
ter in  his  ears  than  it  does  in  their  own.  But  words 
are  two-edged  tools,  and  while  they  are  talking  to 
the  Man  Outside  in  the  words  of  savages,  they  are 
partly  thinking  of  him  as  If  he  were  a  savage,  and 
they  are  partly  behaving  like  savages,  when  they 
come  out  into  the  open  air. 

The  old  savages,  we  have  seen,  thought  of  the 
Man  Outside  as  many  men  ;  and  their  descendants 
sometimes  talk  as  if  they  thought  there  were  two 
Men,  ruling  over  them  by  two  contradictory  rules, 
which  they  foolishly  label  Science  and  Religion. 

The  Man  Outside  does  Indeed  speak  to  us  by  two 
voices;  but  If  they  seem  to  contradict  each  other, 
that  shows  that  we  are  not  listening  carefully.  Hope 
Is  not  less  the  word  of  God  than  Sense,  and  one 
word  has  to  be  interpreted  by  the  other.  In  these 
days  men  seem  to  be  divided  Into  two  parties,  each 
listening  carefully  to  one  word,  and  shutting  their 
ears  against  the  other  with  Mediterranean  cotton- 
wool. That  Is  the  sin  of  this  age  ;  it  is  that  way 
madness  lies. 

If  Idealism  has  any  business  on  earth  It  Is  here. 
Nobel  has  left  his  Third  Bequest  for  the  cure  of 
bodily  suffering:  he  has  offered  his  Fourth  Bequest 
to  whomsoever  can  minister  to  the  mind  diseased. 


240  The  New  Word 


VI 


There  is  another,  and  a  true  distinction,  which  will 
be  always  with  us  while  we  live,  however  we  may 
strive  to  do  away  with  it,  between  the  Man  Outside 
and  the  Idol  whom  we  ignorantly  worship. 

Life,  says  one  of  those  idealists  who  are  expelled 
from  Oxford,  and  exiled  from  England,  and  de- 
nied the  alms  of  Royal  Literary  Funds,—- 

"  Life,  like  a  dome  of  many-coloured  glass, 
Stains  the  white  radiance  of  Eternity." 

So  does  the  stained-glass  window  of  the  church 
debar  our  vision  of  the  sun;  so  is  the  Winged  Fig- 
ure it  reveals,  and  that  whether  we  spell  its  name 
Idol  or  Ideal,  a  false  likeness  of  the  Man  Outside. 
Until  that  is  learnt,  nothing  is  truly  learnt  about 
God. 

God  is  the  right  name  of  that  Figure  on  the 
painted  window,  a  Figure  made  by  man's  hands, 
however  honourably  and  beautifully;  and  whosoever 
confounds  it  with  That  of  which  It  is  the  symbol  is 
the  heretic  of  the  True  Church. 

It  is  not  the  business  of  the  Idealist  to  break  the 
painted  window,  but  rather  to  make  it.  In  so  far 
as  he  is  an  artist  as  well  as  a  scientist,  window-mak- 
ing is  his  calling  and  his  craft.  The  eye  of  man 
can  seldom  bear  to  look  into  the  burning  core  of 


Theology:  The  Painted  Window       241 

Verihood,  and  cannot  bear  It  long.  Light  tempered 
to  his  need  is  strained  through  yonder  shining  False- 
hood, dyed  in  the  paints  of  the  blue  sky  and  green 
earth  and  foaming  sea,  the  yellow  day,  the  violet 
night,  the  red  of  blood,  the  glory  of  all  creation's 
golden  wheels. 

The  falsehood  is  always  there,  the  Figure  changes. 
It  is  the  calling  of  the  Idealist  to  cleanse  and  change 
it,  and  to  make  ever  fairer  and  fairer  Figures,  better 
and  better  likenesses  of  the  Man  Outside. — The 
word  idealist  does  not  mean  idolator,  but  idol- 
maker,  after  all. 

The  Idealist  is  called  to  make  windows  ;  let  them 
look  to  it  who  will  not  give  him  leave.  Let  them 
look  to  it  who  imprison  him  in  their  temples,  so 
that  he  must  needs  begin  his  work  by  breaking 
theirs.  Every  Catholic  Church  is  a  jail  for  the 
Idealist,  whether  it  be  built  in  Rome,  or  in  Mecca, 
or  in  Pekin,  or  in  Benares.  And  it  does  not  lie  with 
them  who  are  sending  out  into  the  four  corners  of 
the  earth  to  break  windows,  some  of  them  older  and 
more  nobly  painted  than  their  own,  to  cry  out  when 
their  own  come  under  the  glazier's  hands.  They 
who  live  in  glass  houses  ought  not  to  throw  stones. 
The  bloodiest  iconoclasts  the  world  has  ever  seen 
ought  not  to  whine  so  miserably  when  their  own 
Idol  is  being  washed. 

The  Window-Cleaner  on  his  side,  must  heed 
neither  whining  nor  stoning.  The  Idealist  has  a 
Master  whom  he  serves,  and  that  Master  is  the 


242  The  New  Word 

Man  Outside.  He  must  go  whither  he  Is  sent, 
suffering  no  man  to  hinder  him,  for  he  has  a  great 
privilege.  He  cannot  be  stayed,  neither  can  he  be 
turned  back,  neither  can  any  man  lay  hold  of  him  to 
his  hurt,  for  he  is  the  ambassador  of  a  great  King. 
If  Heaven  has  lodged  the  cause  of  Truth  in  his 
person,  what  can  the  people  of  K'wang  do  to  him  ? 


SEVENTEENTH  HEAD 


THE  FORBIDDEN  FRUIT 

The  Fear  of  God. — i.  The  fVorship  of  Falsehood. — 
2.  The  Knowledge  of  Good  and  Evil. — 3.  Meaning  of 
Religion. — 4.  The  Gods  afraid  of  Alan. — 5.  Divinity 
and  Diplomacy. 

\\T^  have  now  got  so  far  In  this  Inquiry  as  to 
^  '  see  that  a  work  of  an  Idealist  tendency  must 
be  a  work  of  a  practical  tendency,  and  In  some  way 
or  other  of  a  reforming  tendency.  As  the  Mate- 
rialist, by  more  careful  measuring  and  clearer  reck- 
oning corrects  the  mistakes  of  sense,  so  must  the 
Idealist  correct  the  mistakes  of  hope.  Both  work 
towards  the  same  end,  the  benefit  of  mankind,  and 
both  have  to  overcome  the  same  enemy,  the  stupid- 
ity of  mankind. 

The  Buddha  taught  that  all  evil  was  owing  to 
ignorance.  But  that  Is  not  so.  In  a  great  measure 
ignorance  Itself  Is  owing  to  stupidity,  which  In  Its 
turn  is  a  mixture  of  laziness  and  cowardice,  of  sloth 
that  cannot  learn,  and  fear  that  will  not. 

It  is  against  sloth  that  the  Gods  themselves  fight 
in  vain.  We  cannot  raise  the  beast  to  be  a  man, 
nor  change  the  black  man  into  a  white.  The  leop- 
ard and  the  Ethiop  have  both  fallen  behind  in  the 
race,  and  we  may  hinder  ourselves  more  than  we 
help  them,  if  we  try  to  run  in  couples  with  them. 

243 


244  The  New  Word 

There  are  signs  of  other  runners  halting  ;  those 
Mediterranean  men,  who  led  the  van  so  proudly  in 
their  day,  have  they  not  been  caught  up  and  passed 
by  the  Baltic  folks  ?  And  in  spite  of  all  the  talk 
about  Humanity  the  Ethiop  does  not  want  to  run 
in  couples  with  us.  The  African  does  not  vv^ant  to 
rule  the  European,  but  only  to  be  ruled  by  him 
kindly.  The  poor  do  not  want  to  rob  the  rich  man ; 
they  only  want  him  to  pay  his  poor  rate  honourably. 
Even  the  bomb  thrown  at  a  king  by  the  poor  mad 
anarchist  is  only  his  Insane  way  of  asking  for  a  sane 
king. 

Fear  Is  a  foe  of  far  other  mettle.  The  story  of 
religion  is  on  the  whole  the  story  of  the  conquest 
of  fear  by  hope.  This  is  a  foe  worth  fighting,  for 
when  the  Man  Outside  wrestles  with  us  under  this 
form  he  means  us  to  prevail. 

"The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of  wis- 
dom." But  it  Is  not  the  end.  When  Alexander 
asked  Diogenes  If  he  were  not  afraid  of  him,  the 
Cynic  answered,^ — ^^"  Are  you  a  good  man  ? — If  you 
are,  why  should  I  be  afraid  of  you  ?  "  If  the  Man 
Outside  is  a  good  Man,  then  he  cannot  want  us  to 
fear  him.  He  can  only  want  us  to  live  so  that  we 
need  not  fear  him. 

Fear  Is  the  enemy  that  the  Idealist  has  to  fight. 
And  yet  fear  is  the  hardest  word  for  him  to  under- 
stand.    For  Fear  and  Hope  are  in  metastrophe. 


Exegetics:    The   Forbidden    Fruit      245 


The  wise  healer,  called  in  to  cure  a  disease,  will 
seek  first  to  understand  it,  before  he  prescribes  a 
remedy.  In  the  case  before  us  we  have  not  only  a 
disease  to  overcome,  but  a  refractory  patient  ;  and 
the  bad  temper  of  the  patient  is  a  leading  symptom 
of  the  disease.  Why  do  men  fear  relief  from  fear? 
Why  do  they  hope  against  hope  ?  Why  do  they 
deem  it  wicked  to  write  books  of  an  idealist  tend- 
ency ? 

The  thoughtful  man,  as  he  walks  here  amidst 
mankind,  must  often  feel  as  if  he  had  strayed  into  a 
madhouse,  wherein  he  could  not  raise  his  voice 
above  a  whisper  without  drawing  down  on  himself 
the  frantic  clamour  of  the  inmates,  or  worse,  their 
silent,  murderous  hate. 

For  the  fool  never  forgives.  While  the  two  par- 
ties named  Gnostics  and  Idiots,  the  learned  and  the 
unlearned,  were  contending  for  the  mastery  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  the  wise  were  bidden  to  suffer  the 
fools  gladly.  But  fools  never  suffer  the  wise  gladly. 
The  triumph  of  the  Idiots  was  sealed  by  the  blood 
of  the  Gnostics;  and  from  that  day  to  this,  like  the 
frenzied  Pope  who  dipped  his  pen  in  the  consecrated 
chalice  that  he  might  curse  his  enemy  in  the  very 
blood  of  Christ,  the  Catholic  Church  has  written  in 
the  blood  of  truth-seekers  the  excommunication  of 
Truth. 


246  The  New  Word 

Enmity  to  Verihood  is  older  than  that  strange  re- 
vival which  I  call  Catholic,  or  Mediterranean,  to 
mark  it  off  from  the  old  Christ-eating  cults  whose 
language  it  gruesomely  repeats.  Falsehood  is  found 
in  every  religion,  but  only  in  the  Catholic  Christian- 
ity is  it  the  foundation  of  religion.  The  first  word 
of  Buddhism  is  Know.  The  first  word  of  Christian- 
ity is  Believe.  And  the  merit  lies  not  in  believing 
what  is  true,  but  in  believing  what  is  false.  The 
greater  the  falsehood,  the  greater  the  faith.  As  one 
of  themselves  has  written, — "  I  believe  because  it  is 
impossible." 

The  anti-scientific  instinct,  which  Christianity  has 
hallowed  as  the  cardinal  virtue.  Is  therefore  not  the 
fear  that  science  may  be  wrong,  but  that  it  may  be 
right.  Heaven  is  trying  to  hide  its  laws  from  man, 
and  he  advances  to  discover  them  at  his  peril.  The 
truth  of  the  discovery  is  no  excuse  for  the  discov- 
erer. When  the  geologists  found  out  that  the  earth 
was  more  than  5804  years  old,  many  good  men 
thought  them  mistaken,  because  the  margin  of  the 
English  Bible  had  fixed  the  date  of  creation  at  4004 
B.  C.  When  the  good  men  had  it  shown  to  them 
that  this  date  rested  on  Archbishop  Usher's  author- 
ity, and  not  on  God's,  they  held  their  peace,  and  let 
the  geologists  go  on.  But  they  did  not  thank  the 
geologists.  Their  feeling  was  that  the  geologists 
had  shown  great  rashness  and  presumption,  and 
that  they  would  have  done  much  better  to  keep  their 
discoveries  to  themselves. 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit       247 

The  view  that  Heaven  means  us  to  learn  Its  ways  ; 
that  its  first  commandment  is — Thou  Shalt  Learn  ; 
and  that  such  learners  as  Copernicus  and  Linne  and 
Darwin  have  rendered  more  faithful  service  to 
Heaven  than  the  whole  roll  of  saints  and  puritans, 
would  be  rejected  unanimously  by  the  conscience  of 
Christendom.  It  is  in  the  interest  of  Heaven,  It  is 
in  defence  of  their  God,  that  the  theologians  have 
laid  their  ban  on  all  the  sciences  in  turn,  on  the 
lore  of  the  stars,  of  the  rocks,  of  the  atoms,  of  the 
frame  of  man,  of  his  mind,  of  the  Hebrew  language 
and  literature,  of  Eastern  history,  and  of  the  history 
of  life. 

Such  Is  the  disease.  It  Is  this  habit  of  mind 
which  brings  about  the  so-called  conflict  between 
Religion  and  Science,  which  well-meaning  men,  who 
had  not  thought  over  the  meaning  of  the  word  Re- 
ligion, and  the  word  Science,  have  wanted  to  make 
up.  The  conflict  is  between  the  view  that  God  is 
displeased  by  the  search  for  verihood,  and  that  he  is 
pleased.     Such  a  conflict  ought  never  to  be  made  up. 

To-day  the  struggles  of  the  patient  are  getting 
feebler,  but  the  disease  Is  still  there.  Only  the  other 
day  an  Anglo-Roman  priest,  of  course  not  a  bishop, 
was  brave  enough  to  tell  his  congregation, — "We 
must  face  the  truth  about  our  documents."  Fancy 
a  teacher  of  medicine  saying  to  his  class, — "We 
must  face  the  truth  about  our  drugs."  Fancy  a  lec- 
turer on  astronomy  telling  his  hearers, — "  We  must 
face  the   truth  about  the  stars."     The    man    who 


248  The  New  Word 

shrinks  from  facing  the  truth  about  his  documents 
does  so  because  he  fears  they  are  false  documents. 
What  should  we  think  of  the  counsel  who  said  to  his 
client  in  open  court. — "We  must  face  the  truth 
about  our  evidence."  What  would  a  tradesman 
think  of  the  banknote  tendered  to  him  by  a  cus- 
tomer, with  the  remark, — "  I  must  face  the  truth 
about  this  note." 

Again,  and  within  the  last  year  or  two,  a  paper 
was  read  at  a  gathering  in  England  called  the 
Church  Congress,  on  the  teaching  of  religion  in  our 
great  public  schools,  the  schools  for  rich  men's 
sons.  And  the  argument  of  the  paper  was  on  this 
wise:^ — When  the  boys  to  whom  we  have  taught 
religion  in  the  schools  go  on  to  the  universities,  and 
find  out  that  educated  men  no  longer  believe  what 
we  have  taught  them,  they  turn  round  and  despise 
us  for  having  taught  them  falsely  ;  what  then  is  the 
least  truth  that  we  must  teach  them  in  the  schools, 
so  as  not  to  be  despised  by  them  after  they  have 
gone  to  the  universities  ? 

That  was  the  question  raised  by  the  paper,  and 
on  that  the  discussion  turned.  It  was  not  a  question 
of  how  much  truth  they  might  teach  the  boys,  but 
how  little  truth  they  must  teach.  No  one  in  that 
Church  Congress  hinted  that  the  whole  truth  should 
be  taught.  No  one  proposed  that  they  should 
teach  as  much  truth  as  they  could.  No  one  argued 
as  though  the  truth  about  God  were  a  good  thing 
for  boys  to  know,   or  other  than   an  unnecessary, 


Exegettcs:  The  Forbidden  Fruit       249 

and  a  dangerous,  and  on  the  whole  a  hurtful  thing. 
That  the  teaching  of  some  truth  was  a  regret- 
table necessity  was  the  basis  of  the  discussion.  And 
why  was  it  a  necessity  ?  In  order  to  save  the 
teachers  from  contempt.  Truth  was  to  be  told,  not 
for  the  benefit  of  the  boys,  but  for  the  benefit  of 
the  teachers.  They  were  in  this  dilemma ;  to  please 
God  they  must  teach  falsely,  and  to  please  the  boys 
they  must  teach  truthfully.  And  so  that  great 
gathering  of  churchmen,  that  gathering  of  all  that 
was  best  and  most  representative  of  English 
Christianity  in  the  dawn  of  the  twentieth  century, 
sat  there  and  painfully  debated  how  far  they  must 
betray  their  God  to  save  themselves. — In  the  end 
they  adjourned  the  discussion,  that  they  might  pass 
a  resolution  in  favour  of  teaching  the  whole  false- 
hood in  the  schools  for  poor  men's  sons. 

If  the  sufferers  from  this  disease  were  asked  to 
diagnose  their  state  of  mind,  they  would  most  likely 
answer  that  fuller  knowledge  tends  to  make  men 
lose  faith.  Their  reasoning  seems  to  be  somewhat 
after  this  fashion: — "I  believe  that  God  made  the 
earth,  and  made  it  flat;  if  I  now  learn  that  it  is  not 
flat,  I  shall  cease  to  believe  that  it  was  made  by 
God."  Through  the  last  few  centuries  we  seem  to 
hear  a  succession  of  men  crying  out,  after  each 
fresh  discovery  of  verihood, — "The  earth  moves; 
therefore  there  is  no  God !  " — "  The  earth  is  mil- 
lions of  years  old;  therefore  there  is  no  God!" — 
^'The  Buddha  was  a  great  and  good  man;  there- 


250  The  New  Word 

fore  there  Is  no  God !  " — "  There  are  traces  of  more 
than  one  hand  In  the  writing  of  the  Pentateuch; 
therefore  there  Is  no  God! " — Such  a  frame  of  mind 
can  hardly  be  called  faith.  The  man  who  holds  to 
his  God  by  a  single  hair,  ready  to  let  go  if  it  should 
turn  out  that  there  is  something  in  wireless  teleg- 
raphy, or  that  there  are  no  whales  In  the  Mediter- 
ranean sea,  is  surely  not  far  removed  from  an  in- 
fidel. 

Such  is  the  leading  symptom  of  the  disease.     It 
is  time  to  look  for  the  bacillus. 


II 


"And  the  Gods  commanded  the  Man,  saying, — 
*  Of  every  tree  in  the  garden  eating  thou  shalt  eat; 
but  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil 
thou  shalt  not  eat;  for  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest 
thereof,  dying  thou  shalt  die.' 

"And  the  Serpent  said  unto  the  Woman, — 
'Surely  ye  shall  not  die.  For  the  Gods  know  that 
In  the  day  ye  eat  thereof,  then  your  eyes  shall  be 
opened,  and  ye  shall  be  as  the  Gods,  knowing  good 
and  evil.' 

"And  the  eyes  of  them  both  were  opened. 

"  And  the  Gods  said, — '  Behold  the  man  is  become 
as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil.  And  now,  lest 
he  live  for  ever'     .     .     ." 

The  tabu  of  truth  stands  menacing  on  the  first 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit        251 

page  of  the  old  Book  of  Truth.  The  book  which 
was  read  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  by  more 
than  a  tenth  part  of  mankind,  as  the  book  of  the 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  opens  with  the  curse 
laid  on  mankind  for  having  stolen  the  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil  from  God. 

The  readers  of  this  book  were  not  likely  to  be 
troubled  by  the  contradiction.  It  was  by  no  means 
the  only  test  of  faith.  However,  to  us  who  read  it 
as  a  curious  folk-tale,  it  may  serve  as  a  help  to 
understand  why  good  men  fear  that  God  fears  the 
truth  about  himself. 

On  the  face  of  it,  the  story  is  a  relic  of  snake- 
worship,  that  ancient  worship  of  knowledge  under 
the  form  of  a  snake,  which  has  left  traces  half  over 
the  world;  which  is  a  living  worship  in  some  lands 
to-day.  A  reverent  king  removed  the  brazen  ser- 
pent out  of  the  house  of  Yahweh,  but  no  one  has 
been  reverent  enough  to  remove  the  serpent  myth 
out  of  the  book  of  Yahweh. 

In  spite  of  apologetic  editing  we  still  can  see  that 
the  Serpent  is  the  hero  of  the  story.  The  jealous 
Elohim  try  to  keep  this  knowledge  from  the  Man 
by  threats;  the  Serpent  tells  him  that  their  threats 
are  vain,  and  bids  him  learn.  His  assurance  is  ful- 
filled, and  the  threat  of  the  Elohim  falsified.  Like 
Prometheus,  like  many  a  Prometheus,  the  Serpent 
suffers  for  his  material  benefit  to  the  Man,  but  the 
gift  once  bestowed  cannot  be  taken  away.  The 
Man,  too,  suffers,  but  he  does  not  die.     Instead,  the 


252  The  New  IVord 

Elohim  are  driven  to  provide  against  his  gaining 
eternal  life;  as  in  another  myth  they  devise  means 
to  keep  him  out  of  Heaven,  when  he  threatens  to 
take  their  Kingdom  with  his  Tower. 

The  feeling  that  Inspires  this  parable  is  not  alto- 
gether the  Christian  feeling  that  knowledge,  as 
such,  is  an  evil  rather  than  a  good.  Still  less  is  it 
that  profane  learning  is  frowned  upon  by  Heaven. 
There  is  no  hint  in  the  text  that  the  Elohim  grudged 
to  the  Man  the  knowledge  of  the  earth's  shape,  or 
of  its  age,  or  of  his  own  shape  and  age,  or  of  any 
other  kindred  topic  banned  by  Christian  morality. 
Those  attempts  to  widen  the  tabu  must  seek  war- 
rant elsewhere.  The  knowledge  here  forbidden  is 
of  one  kind  only;  it  is  the  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil.    The  embargo  is  not  on  Science,  but  Religion. 

Such  a  tabu  cannot  be  understood  till  we  recover 
the  meaning  of  the  word  religion. 

Ill 

The  root  meaning  of  religion,  or  religio,  had 
already  passed  out  of  mind  in  the  days  of  Cicero, 
who  suggested  that  the  word  might  come  from 
relegere,  to  read  over,  the  recital  of  a*  liturgy.  To 
Lactantius  and  Augustine  it  seemed  to  come  rather 
from  re-ligare,  to  fast-bind,  and  to  mean  the  bond 
or  covenant  between  God  and  man.  Both  guesses 
have  truth  In  them,  but  neither  goes  far  enough 
back. 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit       253 

Religion,  In  Augustine's  sense,  Is  found  in  its  most 
natural  form  to-day  on  the  west  coast  of  Africa. 
As  soon  as  a  child  Is  born  his  parents  drive  a  bar- 
gain for  him,  much  like  godfathers  and  godmothers 
elsewhere,  with  an  unseen  spirit.  The  child  binds 
himself  by  proxy  to  keep  some  tabu,  such  as  not  to 
eat  when  he  is  on  the  water,  or  to  abstain  from  the 
flesh  of  some  animal;  and  In  return  the  spirit  binds 
himself,  as  It  should  seem  by  the  same  proxies,  to 
take  care  of  the  child,  and  to  lead  him  safely  all 
the  days  of  his  life.  That  is  a  covenant;  It  Is  the 
famous  Covenant  of  Sinai  In  the  germ. 

But  religion  is  much  older  than  that.  Wars  are 
older  than  treaties,  and  the  covenant  Is  In  the  nature 
of  a  treaty.  In  the  beginning  man  was  at  war  with 
nature;  the  Men  Outside  were  for  the  most  part 
•enemies,  and  If  any  of  them  were  friends,  those 
could  be  safely  disregarded.  The  first  business,  and 
the  only  pressing  business,  was  to  defend  oneself 
from  the  lightning,  the  torrent  and  the  tiger,  and 
from  those  unseen  tigers  whose  teeth  were  felt  in 
the  mysterious  aches  and  pains  of  suffering  man. 

Against  these  foes  man  furnished  himself  with 
many  weapons,  and  among  them  In  turn  came  the 
magic  spell. — I  Interrupt  myself  here  to  set  right  a 
mistake  which  runs  through  all  the  books  on  folk- 
lore I  have  seen,  except  the  fundamental  work  of 
Massey.  When  the  wild  man  pours  out  a  pail  of 
water  on  the  ground  to  get  rain  from  the  clouds, 
that  is  not  "  sympathetic  magic."     The  wild  man  Is 


254  The  New  Word 

not  an  electrician.  It  Is  sign  language.  It  is  the 
oldest  language,  and  therefore  the  one  the  clouds 
are  most  likely  to  understand.  The  Gods  are  al- 
ways rather  backward  in  learning  languages;  even 
some  very  civilised  Gods  have  not  yet  learned  to 
read,  and  after  you  have  written  your  book  of 
prayers,  you  have  to  recite  it  aloud  to  them.  Bud- 
dha, we  know,  can  read,  and  hence  the  praying- 
wheel. — It  is  sign  language,  and  It  is  no  more  mag- 
ical than  all  language  is. 

The  use  of  the  magic  spell  of  course  Is  not  con- 
fined to  the  case  of  the  unseen  tigers.  A  party  of 
hunters  sent  out  by  a  king  of  my  own  creation,  to 
catch  a  leopard  for  me,  armed  themselves  with  a 
spell,  some  bows  and  arrows,  and  a  gun.  The  spell 
failed  to  work,  the  arrows  partly  failed,  and  the  gun 
did  the  business.  This  was  the  triumph  of  science 
over  religion,  or  rather  of  the  new  religion  over  the 
old. 

For  the  old  religion  is  the  spell.  A  black  man 
showed  me  how  the  spell  ought  to  have  worked,  by 
folding  up  his  fingers,  and  closing  his  mouth.  The 
spell  ought  to  have  bound  the  leopard's  claws  and 
jaws, — and  would  have  done  so  If  the  spell-maker 
had  fasted  properly  the  night  before.  In  the  same 
way  the  unseen  leopards  are  bound  by  liturgies  and 
Incantations.     Relegere  and  religare  are  both  right. 

In  winter  the  Russian  pope,  in  whom  the  northern 
wizard  Is  still  plainly  to  be  seen  beneath  his  Byzan- 
tine robes,  walks  through  the  forest,  chanting  as  he 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit        255 

goes,  to  compel  the  Pagan  spirits  of  flood  and  fell 
to  fall  behind  him,  while  he  leads  them  to  their 
prison  beneath  the  frozen  lake.  In  summer  the 
same  pope  walks  through  the  cornfield,  chanting 
other  litanies  to  compel  the  Christian  spirit  to  give 
a  plenteous  harvest;  and  if  the  incantation  fails  to 
work,  the  peasants  lay  the  fault  on  the  enchanter, 
and  maltreat  him,  sometimes  to  his  death.  In  prayer 
books  further  west  there  is  a  Prayer  against  Rain; 
but  still  the  children  keep  their  old  prayer  to  the 
Rain-God,— 

"  Rain,  rain,  go  away, 
Come  again  another  day." 

All  that  is  religion.  It  is  the  bond  in  which  the 
familiar  spirit  Is  bound  by  the  magician;  it  Is  the 
magic  formula  which  the  unwilling  djinn  obeys  in 
the  Arabian  tales.  The  liturgies,  the  rites,  the 
dances,  the  sacred  observances  of  all  kinds  by  which 
the  outside  Powers,  seen  or  unseen,  are  compelled  to 
obey  man,  are  religious;  the  oath  by  which  man 
binds  himself  to  them  Is  also  religious  In  Its  turn. 
The  root-meaning  of  religion  is  not  covenant,  but 
bond.  It  Is  not  a  treaty,  but  a  conquest,  not  an 
agreement,  but  a  fetter. 

It  was  the  knowledge  of  the  fetters  by  which 
they  could  be  bound,  of  the  laws  which  they  them- 
selves obeyed,  In  short  the  knowledge  of  religion, 
that  the  Elohim  in  the  story  grudged  to  the  Man. 


256  The  New  Word 


IV 


If  the  Men  Outside  did  not  resent  man's  control 
they  would  not  be  human.  When  Prospero  asks  his 
servant  sprite, — "  How  now,  moody,  what  wouldst 
thou?" — Ariel  answers, — "My  liberty."  It  is  their 
sleepless  dread  lest  man  should  master  them  by  his 
conjurations  that  leads  them  to  withhold  their  names 
from  him,  like  the  Red  Indian  who  goes  through 
life  under  a  pseudonym  to  baffle  the  malice  of  his 
enemies.  An  enchantment,  it  should  seem,  like  a 
medieval  writ,  must  call  the  defendant  by  his  right 
name,  or  the  whole  process  is  null  and  void.  So 
Moses  does  not  dare  to  ask  the  Man  In  the  burning 
bush  for  his  true  name,  but  only  for  some  name  by 
which  to  call  him;  and  the  Man  answers  still  more 
guardedly,  "  I  am  who  I  am."  The  Third  of  the 
celebrated  Ten  Commandments  witnesses  to  the 
same  belief. 

As  we  have  seen,  it  is  not  altogether  a  false  be- 
lief. The  Name  has  an  unexplained  power  in  the 
Mystery.  Well  did  those  old  Hebrews  hide  the 
right  name  of  their  God,  calling  him  Lord  and  King 
and  Bright  One.  We,  for  our  part,  call  him  the 
Good  One.  We  do  so  by  way  of  compliment,  as 
our  peasants  still  speak  of  the  spirits  of  flood  and 
fell  as  the  Good  People.  They  hope  by  doing  so 
to  coax  them  to  behave  like  good  people.     In  the 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit       257 

meantime  we  have  not  yet  learned  the  right  name 
of  the  Man  Outside. 

In  most  religions  the  ritual  and  the  moral  law, 
the  spell  and  the  tabu,  are  intermingled,  though  in 
most  of  them  words  count  for  more  than  deeds. 
Heresy  is  a  greater  sin  than  homicide  in  every  well- 
regulated  church.  The  view  that  Pure  Religion  is 
visiting  the  widow  and  the  fatherless  in  their  afflic- 
tion is  put  forth  in  the  epistle  which  Luther  con- 
demned as  an  epistle  of  straw. 

The  tabus  come  under  the  influence  of  the  old 
belief.  The  Church  of  Rome  keeps  a  banking  ac- 
count with  God.  So  many  masses  said,  so  many 
fasts  and  mortifications,  so  many  orphans  fed,  so 
many  Protestants  burned, — ^and  so  many  'years 
struck  off  the  purgatorial  sentence.  If  the  saint 
leaves  a  balance  to  his  credit,  God  is  debited  with 
that  balance  in  the  general  account  of  sinners.  As 
soon  as  God's  balance  is  on  the  wrong  side  a  soul 
escapes  from  Purgatory,  like  a  drop  of  water  over- 
flowing when  the  tank  is  full.  These  dynamic  laws 
work  even  more  thoroughly  in  earlier  religions.  In 
the  Ramayana  a  wicked  man  who  wishes  to  destroy 
the  world  sets  himself  to  practise  unheard  of  aus- 
terities in  order  that  he  may  be  able  to  compel  the 
Gods  to  execute  his  purpose.  The  dismayed  Gods 
hold  a  council.  They  cannot  evade  their  obliga- 
tions. Enough  fasts  endured,  enough  gashes  self- 
inflicted,  and  they  must  destroy  the  world.  And  so, 
as  the  sole  resource,  one  of  them  goes  down  to  earth, 


2^8  The  New  Word 

and  forcibly  Interrupts  the  pious  exercises  of  this 
mechanical  moralist. 

That  is  the  sequel  to  the  story  of  the  tree  of 
knowledge.  It  was  in  their  own  defence  that  the 
Elohim  forbade  the  knowledge  of  their  own  laws  to 
the  Man.  They  behaved  just  like  the  Philistines 
who  forbade  the  Israelites  the  use  of  iron;  just  like 
the  Christian  Powers  who  forbid  the  heathen  the 
use  of  magazine  rifles. 

Perhaps  it  is  also  in  their  own  defence  that  other 
personages  have  shown  a  like  jealousy  of  knowledge 
ever  since. 


To-day,  Theology,  driven  from  every  other  cor- 
ner of  the  field  of  knowledge,  is  sheltering  itself  in 
its  last  ditch  under  a  shield  borrowed  from  the 
enemy.  The  theologians  are  claiming  to  be  special- 
ists. They  are  saying  to  the  Materialists, — "  Each 
of  us  has  his  own  department :  you  leave  us  alone, 
and  we  will  leave  you  alone." 

The  Materialist  may  accept  that  apology.  The 
Idealist  cannot.  For  it  is,  alas!  in  their  own  de- 
partment that  the  theologians  are  at  their  worst. 
Their  Hebrew  scholarship  is  a  hundred  times  worse 
than  their  Latin  scholarship.  Their  maps  of  Heaven 
are  far  falser  than  their  maps  of  earth.  The  grand 
fault  of  the  theologians  is,  not  that  they  have  known 
nothing  about  man,  but  that  they  have  known  noth- 
ing about  God. 


Exegetics:  The  Forbidden  Fruit       259 

The  sad  thing  Is  that  all  this  divinity  Is  at  bottom 
only  diplomacy.  All  this  Talk  about  God  ends  in 
talk  about  the  government  of  men.  Every  priest  is 
still  at  heart  a  king,  and  every  theologian  a  law- 
giver. Catholic  Theology  has  not  been  building  a 
house  of  cards  all  this  time,  with  Its  Andronlcan 
words.  It  has  been  rebuilding  the  Capitol.  The 
Man  who  hides  In  so  much  language  is  not  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  but  Caesar.  The  crowning  dogma,  the 
top-stone  of  the  edifice,  is  this,  that  all  the  world 
shall  kneel  and  kiss  the  toe  of  whomsoever  rules  in 
Rome;  and  all  Roman  Catholic  Theology,  however 
honestly  it  may  be  written,  Is  a  means  to  that  end. 


EIGHTEENTH  HEAD 


THE   PYRAMID 

Diagnosis 1.       Worship    of    Death. — 2.      Madness. — 

3.  Making  and  Breaking. — ^4.  The  Devil. — 5.  The 
Word  of  the  Black  Man.— 6.     The  Puritan. 

/^NE  of  those  poets  who  receive  honorary  de- 
^^  grees  from  Oxford,  and  peerages  from  Eng- 
land, and  pensions  from  Royal  Funds,  one  of  those 
idealists  who  are  found  foregathering  with  arch- 
bishops in  Metaphysical  Societies,  gave  the  last 
generation  this  advice: 

"  Leave  thou  thy  sister  when  she  prays 
Her  early  Heaven,  her  happy  views." 

It  is  well-meant  advice.  It  is  kindly  advice.  It 
is  the  advice  which  the  kind-hearted  Idealist  is 
always  being  tempted  to  take.  The  question  is 
whether  it  is  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  that  he 
should  take  it. 

If  that  kneeling  sister  were  nothing  but  a  Sister, 
if  when  she  rose  from  her  knees  her  llfe%vere  to  be 
spent  In  a  cloister,  or  In  the  holier  cloister  of  the 
homes  of  the  widowed  and  the  fatherless,  minister- 
ing to  them  in  their  affliction,  who  is  there  so  sure 
that  he  has  heard  the  Man  Outside  aright,  as  to 

260 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  261 

interrupt  her  with  the  message?  But  if  her  very 
prayers  and  offices  of  kindness  are  offered  as  tribute 
to  a  Power  that  is  the  enemy  of  mankind;  or  if, 
when  she  rises  from  her  knees,  it  is  to  go  through 
the  world  as  wife  and  mother,  teaching  her  children 
and  her  brothers'  children  to  pray  falsely  in  their 
turn,  it  may  not  be  so  well  to  leave  her  her  early 
Hell,  and  her  unhappy  views.  Is  there  no  heresy 
in  making  the  Mother  more  sacred  than  the  Child? 

It  was  not,  persuaded  by  such  advice,  that  those 
Idealists  who  first  saw  that  Heaven  of  hers,  and 
strenuously  embraced  the  happy  and  unhappy  views, 
went  forth  into  all  the  world,  and  preached  their 
gospel  to  every  creature.  Not  in  obedience  to  such 
advice  did  he  who  had  heard  glad  tidings  of  great 
joy  and  fearful  tidings  of  damnation,  leave  his  sis- 
ter her  false  Olympus  and  her  devilish  mythology, 
while  she  prayed  to  Zeus  or  Isis.  Not  to  such  music 
beat  the  hearts  of  those  who  compassed  sea  and 
land,  crossed  deserts,  braved  angry  mobs,  confronted 
Roman  judges,  fought  with  wild  beasts  at  Ephesus, 
and  alas!  fought  like  wild  beasts  on  the  same  spot 
thereafter.  The  advice  is  well  meant,  but  it  comes 
two  thousand  years  too  late.  It  should  have  been 
offered  to  Saint  Paul. 

The  poet  who  gave  that  advice  acted  like  a  physi- 
cian who  should  give  the  patient  up.  It  is  easy  to 
see  what  was  in  his  mind.  If  the  bandages  that 
have  been  used  to  stunt  the  growth  of  the  Chinese 
girl's  foot  are  removed  in  later  life,  the  effort  of 


262  The  New  JVord 

the  foot  to  regain  its  natural  growth  and  shape 
causes  her  intense  pain.  It  was  that  pain  which  the 
last  generation  had  to  suffer  when  it  read  Darwin's 
book. 

And  this  explanation  shows  us  the  ultimate  nature 
of  the  disease  which  the  Idealist  is  called  in  to  cure. 

The  disease  lies  deeper  than  that  old  tabu  of  re- 
ligion. It  is  older  than  the  Catholic  Church.  It  is 
at  least  as  old  as  the  Great  Pyramid,  which  is  also 
a  Catholic  Church.  And  the  true  name  of  the  dis- 
ease is  not  Fear,  but  Fixity.  It  is  Materialism  in  Its 
idealistic  shape,  because  it  is  the  fixture  of  Hope. 


The  doctors,  whose  science  is  so  honourable,  but 
whose  language  is  so  wretched,  know  a  disease,  not 
easy  to  be  cured,  by  the  name  of  atrophy.  This 
word  is  on  the  face  of  it  the  contradiction  of  metas- 
trophe.  But  the  specialist  is  so  exact,  the  teacher 
Is  so  slow  to  learn,  the  microscope-minded  man  finds 
it  so  hard  to  put  two  and  two  together,  that  we 
must  help  him  to  understand  the  doctor's  word. 

According  to  that  sepulchre  of  sense,  the  lexicon, 
atrophy  means  wasting  away  for  want  of  nourish- 
ment, and  comes  from  the  Imaginary  root  tark,  to 
fill  up.  But  as  soon  as  we  make  bold  to  spell  the 
word  atropy,  the  lexicon  betrays  its  secret,  confess- 
ing that  atropy  means  unchanging,  or  ceasing  to 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  263 

turn.  -Tropy  (without  the  a),  it  says,  is  turning 
and  'trophy  (without  the  a)  \s  hardening.  But  let 
us  not  stay  bewildered  there.  This  very  hardening 
is  the  hardening  of  milk  into  butter  in  the  churn. 
-Tropy  is  turning,  and  -trophy  is  churning;  the  Eng- 
lish words  sound  as  well  together  as  the  Greek;  and 
the  makers  of  words  had  an  ear  for  Rhyme,  if  the 
historians  of  words  have  none.  And  what  then  is 
the  real  difference?  The  dairymaid  will  tell  us  that 
the  whole  art  in  churning  is  in  turning  the  milk  al- 
ways the  same  way;  if  you  turn  it  this  way  and  that 
it  will  not  harden  so  quickly  into  butter.  Thus  the 
mystery  of  the  universe  is  revealed  in  the  dairy- 
maid's churn.  The  word  Universe  means  Churn. 
It  is  the  whirl  without  the  swirl. 

Atrophy,  then,  is  softening  instead  of  hardening. 
It  is  weakness  rather  than  emptiness,  the  want  of 
power  to  use  food  rather  than  the  want  of  food,  in 
short  it  is  voluntary  starvation.  Perhaps  the  doc- 
tors of  the  body  understand  their  word  better  than 
the  doctors  of  speech. 

Atrophy  is  hardening  instead  of  softening.  It  is 
the  kind  of  hardening  that  comes  of  ceasing  to  turn. 
The  milk  has  become  thick  by  stagnation.  And  that 
is  the  disease  that  we  are  dealing  with.  It  is  an 
apoplexy  of  the  mind.  It  is  the  relaxation  of  paral- 
ysis. 

Pure  fixture  would  be  Death.  And  we  have  seen 
that  there  is  no  pure  fixture.  The  turning  move- 
ment, like  the  forward  one,  is  changed  into  pressure. 


264  The  New  Word 

The  fixture  of  hope  intensifies  it,  and  the  intensity 
is  one  side  of  the  disease. 

We  can  now  see  the  danger  lurking  in  the  word 
Ideal,  which  is  so  like  the  fixed  Idea.  Here  the 
Idealist  must  begin  to  be  wise,  for  this  is  his  own 
disease.  The  hardness  of  his  mind  is  not  the  blunt- 
ness  of  the  rock,  but  the  severity  of  the  flame, 
which  wavers  in  every  breath  of  air,  and  yet  can 
melt  the  diamond. 

Pure  Fixture  is  an  ideal.  It  is  idealism  in  its 
materialistic  shape.  The  Hope  of  Death  is  the 
death  of  hope.  And  it  is  the  language  of  Death, 
and  of  the  olden  worship  of  Death,  which  we  meet 
with  in  certain  words  familiar  to  most  of  us;  it  is 
Death  in  whom  there  is  no  variableness,  "neither 
shadow  of  turning."  We  have  seen  that  there  is  no 
real  death;  it  is  only  an  ideal,  the  ideal  of  those 
who  are  tired  of  living.  Death  is  an  Andronican 
word,  and  once  meant  deafness,  if  philology  will 
pardon  me  the  rhyme.  That  which  we  speak  of  as 
dying  is  a  metastrophe  too  sharp  for  us  to  measure. 

I  doubt  if  any  man  has  ever  thoroughly  believed 
in  Death.  All  men  believe  in  dying,  although  they 
view  it  with  widely  different  feelings.  Those  Yel- 
low men,  to  whom  we  are  sending  out  to  teach  the 
truth  about  Hell,  will  offer  to  die  for  a  few  shil- 
lings; the  woman  who  was  for  forty  years  Head  of 
the  Church  of  England  offered  a  million  of  money 
to  be  let  off  dying  for  one  moment.  On  the  whole 
the    language    of    death-worship    seems    to    have 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  265 

strengthened  the  dread  of  dying.  There  have  been 
no  terrible  death-beds  in  the  world  except  those  of 
Christians. 

Well  may  those  who  worship  Death  worship  in 
dead  languages.  As  if  there  were  ever  a  dead 
language,  or  a  fixed  language.  As  if  any  genera- 
tion had  ever  used  the  same  language  as  the  past 
generation !  As  if  one  man  had  ever  used  the  same 
language  as  any  other  man ! — Away  with  these  dead 
words  about  dead  Gods!  Away  with  all  dead 
books,  beginning  with  dead  lexicons,  and  ending 
with  dead  liturgies,  for  they  are  one  and  the  same. 
— I  claim  this  Bequest  for  works  of  a  living  tend- 
ency. 

The  Cell  is  more  than  the  Shell.  When  one  of 
these  twain  must  perish,  let  us  see  to  it  that  it  be 
the  Shell. 


II 


Faith,  says  the  arch-antagonist  of  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, faith  is  certainty.  It  is  the  certainty  that  in 
the  long  run  kills  the  hope.  Faith,  fixture,  Matter, 
death — all  these  are  names  for  the  same  fatal  tend- 
ency. The  materialistic  belief  In  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  has  ended  In  almost  strangling  the  nat- 
ural belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 

A  defender  of  dead  words  about  God,  whose 
book  was  for  long,  and  may  be  still,  put  into  the 
hands   of   students   In  our  Anglo-Roman   colleges, 


266  The  New  Woid 

wishing  to  prove  that  there  was  such  a  person  as 
God,  likened  man  to  a  watch.  It  was  a  clever  like- 
ness from  his  point  of  view;  the  watch  was  the  near- 
est he  could  get  to  a  seeming  life  that  should  be  yet 
mere  dead  *'  energy  of  motion."  But  it  was  a  fatal 
likeness  for  him,  because  the  strong  untaught  sense 
of  one  of  those  Idol-breakers  who  wish  to  prove  that 
men  really  are  dead,  turned  it  against  him  by  ask- 
ing,— ^^"When  the  watch  stops,  what  becomes  of  the 
gof  It  is  said  that  most  of  the  students  into 
whose  hands  this  book  is  put  turn  atheists  for  a 
time,  after  reading  It;  and  it  sounds  likely.  The 
Elf  Inside  rebels  against  what  Poe  wisely  named 
rectangular  obscenities. 

The  watch  Is  nearly  at  the  bottom  of  the  mischief, 
but  not  quite.  We  must  look  further  than  that  un- 
lucky apologist. 

The  most  widely  read  book  written  In  the  last 
century  was  a  story  called  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin.  It 
Is  a  story  written  by  a  very  good  white  woman  who 
was  certain  that  black  folks  ought  to  be  just  the 
same  as  white  folks,  and  who  was  found  willing  to 
kill  a  hundred  thousand  men  to  realise  her  Ideal. 
And  In  the  story  there  Is  a  very  good  white  woman 
who  Is  trying  to  make  one  little  black  girl  like  her- 
self, and  who  thinks  the  way  to  do  it  Is  to  teach 
the  little  girl  Mediterranean  folk-lore  which  the 
good  woman  herself  of  course  did  not  understand. 
So  she  begins  by  saying  to  the  little  black, — 

"Who  made  you?" 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  267 

And  does  any  one  remember  what  the  little  black 
answers  ? — 

"Spects  I  growed." 

How  all  Christendom  laughed  over  that  answer 
fifty  years  ago !  And  about  the  same  time  Darwin 
was  giving  the  same  answer  in  more  measured 
words.  It  was  the  full  metastrophe.  Instinct  had 
turned  into  faith  and  returned  into  science.  It  does 
not  do  to  mind  the  laughter  of  all  Christendom. 
They  laugh  best  who  laugh  last. 

The  good  woman,  we  can  see,  had  got  Materialism 
on  the  brain.  She  had  got  that  ugly  rectangle  in 
her  own  mind,  and  she  wanted  to  put  it  into  the 
round  mind  of  the  little  black.  She  was  trying  to 
tell  that  black  child  that  she  was  something  like  a 
watch,  whereas  the  child  knew  very  well  that  she 
was  something  like  a  flower.  The  question  she 
really  put  to  the  child  was, — 

"Who  killed  you?" 

And  the  child's  answer  really  was, — 

*'  I  am  living." 

That  good  white  woman  is  not  dead.  She  is  still 
with  us,  and  she  is  still  spending  vast  sums  of  money 
every  year  in  telling  black  children  that  they  are 
rather  dead  than  living,  and  scrawling  over  that 
precious  manuscript  of  the  Man  Outside,  the  black 
mind,  with  the  bad  language  of  the  Salvation  Army. 
She  is  trying  to  tell  the  Hindus,  who  are  the  most 
devout  people  in  the  world,  that  ugly  story,  and  as 
fast  as  she  succeeds  they  turn  into  criminals.    She 


269  The  New  Word 

is  trying  to  tell  It  to  the  Chinese,  and  when  they  do 
not  want  to  hear  it  she  is  as  ready  as  ever  to  pass 
from  ugly  words  to  ugly  deeds,  and  kill  everybody 
who  hinders  her,  as  long  as  they  are  too  far  away 
for  her  to  hear  the  cries  and  smell  the  blood.  Now 
why  does  that  good  woman — that  otherwise  beauti- 
ful woman — behave  in  that  ugly  way? 

It  is  all  part  of  the  same  question.  The  poison 
Is  In  her  word  "made."  It  Is  no  other  than  the 
word  mad.  We  catch  the  sense  In  saying  that  her 
mind  Is  made  up.  The  man  who  has  so  far  made 
up  his  mind  about  anything  that  It  can  no  longer 
reckon  freely  about  that  thing.  Is  mad  where  that 
thing  Is  concerned;  and  if  he  is  alone  in  his  madness, 
and  his  madness  threatens  us  with  mischief,  we  put 
him  In  a  madhouse. — Madness  Is  the  besetting  sin 
of  the  Idealist.  Let  him  take  warning  by  this  good 
madwoman. 

There  is  another  word,  creation,  but  we  need  not 
look  Into  it.  Whatever  It  may  have  meant  for  those 
who  wrote  It — and  the  Hebrew  word  seems  for- 
merly to  have  meant  shaped  or  measured  out — 
the  good  woman's  words  are  Made,  and  Maker, 
and  Almighty.     Let  us  look  Into  them. 


Ill 


When  I  was  seeking  In  my  Dutch  word-book  for 
some  light  on  the  word  strength,  I  found  two  words 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  269 

for  it,  magt  and  kracht.  Magt  seems  to  be  the  Eng- 
lish might,  but  we  have  lost  kracht  as  a  thing-word. 
The  sense  is  the  making  and  the  cracking  strength, 
or,  as  we  now  should  rather  say,  making  and  break- 
ing. These  are  the  whirl  and  the  swirl.  I  even  found 
this  further  entry — ziel  kracht,  with  the  meaning, 
"  faculty  of  the  soul."  It  is  the  Elf  Inside  break- 
ing through  his  shell,  as  the  bud  cracks  its  green 
sheath  to  burst  into  a  flower. 

What  the  English  language  has  done  is  to  ex- 
change crack  for  break.  The  English  for  kracht, 
therefore,  ought  to  be  bright. 

English  philology,  it  is  true,  refers  bright  to 
beorht,  meaning  to  shine.  I  do  not  know  if  I  am 
bound  to  go  on  quarrelling  with  Doctor  Latham; 
he  was  a  learned  man;  no  doubt  he  had  read  his 
old  English  texts  faithfully;  but  his  fault  is  that  he 
was  an  exact  philologist,  that  is  to  say,  he  was  a 
m.ad  philologist.  However,  I  think  I  have  read  in 
the  Song  of  Brunanbtirh, — 

"  Glad   over  grundas 
God's  candle  beorht." 

God's  candle,  like  other  candles,  burnt,  and  no  doubt 
burnt  brightly.  Indeed,  philology  admits  that  the 
word  beorht  is  of  kin  with  flame.  Burning  is  a 
kind  of  breaking;  as  I  have  said,  a  flame  leaves  a 
worse  bruise  than  an  iron  hammer.  And  heat  is  of 
kin  with  light.     But  it  is  when  the  day  breaks  that 


270  The  New  Word 

the  shadows  flee  away,  and  an  old  form  of  day- 
break Is  day-bright. 

A  later  and  better  authority,  also  writing  In  his 
sleep,  tracks  bright  back  to  an  imaginary  Aryan  root 
bhrag,  meaning  to  blaze,  and  tracks  break  to  an- 
other Imaginary  Aryan  root  bhrag,  meaning  to 
break;  and  so  perhaps  some  future  and  still  better 
authority  may  detect  a  certain  likeness  of  sound  and 
spelling  between  these  two  Imaginary  roots,  as  I 
have  detected  a  likeness  of  sense.  It  Is  a  pleasure 
to  add  that  even  philology  allows  a  common  origin 
to  make  and  might. 

I  deem  It  not  Irrelevant  to  this  Inquiry,  It  Is  per- 
haps the  soul  of  this  Inquiry,  to  demonstrate  time 
after  time,  how  true,  how  strong,  how  bright  as 
well  as  mighty,  are  these  heirlooms  of  ours,  these 
daily  words  which  have  so  long  been  snubbed  and 
overlooked  by  men  whose  eyes  were  dazzled  by  that 
Alexandrian  candle.  They  have  come  down  to  us 
burning  with  the  long  thoughts  of  a  thousand  Baltic 
generations.  They  say  to  us,  and  for  us,  more  than 
we  see  them  saying.  They  go  deeper  than  reckon- 
ing. They  stir  that  In  us  which  music  stirs,  and 
the  light  of  sunrise  and  sunset  stirs,  and  the  scent  of 
northern  violets,  and  the  touch  of  a  dear  and  long 
lost  hand.  They  are  a  glorious  kind  of  covenant. 
We  helped  to  make  them,  with  the  Man  Outside 
also  helping.  They  are  his  revelation,  and  our 
prayers. — Cinderella  has  sat  in  the  ashes  long 
enough,  while  her  ugly  step-sisters  flaunted  It  In  the 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  27 1 

king's  halls.  Let  her  come  forth.  Dress  her  in 
silk  and  gems,  and  set  a  crown  upon  her  head.  She 
is  the  true  bride  of  the  Prince. 

When  we  look  deep  enough  we  find  only  two 
sounds  beneath  all  spoken  words,  one  made  by  in- 
breathing, and  the  other  by  breathing-out.  That  is 
the  whirl-swirl  in  language.  And  when  you  make 
those  sounds  you  find  that  one  is  depression,  and  the 
other  is  expression.  They  are  the  sounds  of  sorrow 
and  of  joy.  These  are  the  two  sounds  that  under- 
lie Might  and  Bright. 

The  word  Almighty  doubles  the  stress  on  Maker. 
And  it  is  that  stress  which  we  press  upon  the  child's 
brain,  fresh  from  its  mother's  womb,  having  coiled 
up  within  it  as  within  a  seed  the  memories  of  sempi- 
ternity.     To  whom  we  say  that  Life  is  Death. 

It  is  not  so. 

We  are  not  made,  we  are  makers.  We  help  to 
make  Life;  the  Man  Outside  calls  us  to  help  him, 
calls  to  us  in  a  thousand  voices  to  partake  the  glori- 
ous toil  of  creation,  to  strike  blow  for  blow  upon 
the  anvil,  and  forge  the  crown  we  are  to  wear. 

IV 

The  words  are  no  sooner  said  than  they  have  to 
be  unsaid  by  another  word  which,  in  mythology  if 
not  in  philology,  once  meant  the  Bright  One;  and 
so  we  have  the  Devil  at  work  breaking  what  the 
Almighty  makes. 


272  The  New  Word 

It  is  significant  that  many  good  men  are  now 
crossing  the  word  Devil  out  of  their  Bibles,  because 
they  find  it  too  ugly.  But  it  was  not  always  ugly. 
That  Devil  was  not  always  so  black  as  he  has  been 
painted  by  the  theologians.  As  they  themselves 
confess,  he  was  formerly  in  Heaven.  There  was  a 
time  when  he  was  the  Light-Bringer,  and  Lord  of 
the  Ascendant. 

This  Man  Outside  is  not  altogether  a  child  of  the 
Mediterranean.  Do  not  the  Scandinavians  still  say 
when  lightning  strikes  the  trees, — "Loki  is  beating 
his  children."— How  shall  we  deal  with  that  learned 
professor  in  Christiania,  who  has  told  us  seriously 
that  this  old  God  of  the  North  drew  his  name  and 
nature  from  the  writings  of  certain  half-Christian 
Anglo-Irish  bards  in  the  tenth  century,  and  that 
Loki  is  a  shortening  of  Lucifer?  He  has  looked 
through  the  wrong  end  of  the  telescope.  Folk  say- 
ings of  that  kind  are  older  than  any  writings  in  the 
world.  The  Roman  hicus,  as  an  ancient  jest  re- 
minds us,  was  a  wood,  and  as  the  ancient  men  drew 
light  from  logs — liicendiis  a  luco — the  wood  is  the 
fire-spirit's  natural  dwelling-place.  Loki  is  the  fire- 
spirit,  and  so  Lucifer  may  have  been,  in  his  first 
avatar,  long  before  ever  he  ascended  into  Heaven 
as  the  morning-star,  and  then  again  descended  into 
Hell,  resuming,  as  it  were,  his  fiery  shape.  I  do 
not  know  if  the  Anglo-Irish  bards  have  mixed  up 
these  two  avatars,  but  I  am  sure  the  professor  has. 
How  can  Norwegian  folk-lore  spring  from  foreign 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  273 

poems  whose  vogue  was  cut  short  in  the  next  gen- 
eration by  St.  Olaf  ?  The  true  explanation  of  Loki's 
late  appearance  in  the  Norse  pantheon  is,  not  that 
he  was  a  newer  god  than  the  Aesir,  but  that  he  was 
a  far  older  one,  whose  cult  revived  like  that  of  the 
old  Pelasgic  gods,  on  the  decay  of  the  Olympians. 
Lokl  has  outlived  Odin,  and  he  is  outliving  Yahweh. 
For  his  English  name  is  Luck. 

We  see  that,  after  all,  words  cannot  be  fixed  alto- 
gether, nor  idols  altogether  broken.  The  Gods  play 
a  strange  game  of  Puss-in-the-Corner  with  each 
other;  the  hopes  of  one  age  pass  into  the  fears  of 
the  next,  and  back  again  into  the  hopes;  the  world 
turns  round,  and  as  it  turns  the  old  constellations  go 
down  into  the  deep,  and  other,  older  Shining  Ones 
rise  up. 

Not  to  know  this,  to  be  afraid  of  this,  is  Atropy. 
The  suffering  of  the  past — perhaps  I  ought  to  write 
the  present — generation  is  like  the  pain  with  which 
the  snake  sloughs  its  old  skin,  ere  it  puts  on  a  new 
one  better  fitted  to  its  needs.  It  is  like  that  with 
which  our  little  fellow-creature  the  lobster  breaks 
out  of  the  old  shell  it  has  outgrown,  while  yet  the 
new  one  has  not  hardened  round  it. — Such  is  the 
disease. 

The  best  remedy  for  disease  is  prevention.  And 
that  is  why  I  am  writing  against  what  is  falsely 
called  Science  as  well  as  against  what  is  falsely 
called  Religion.  I  am  thinking  of  the  new  shell  as 
well  as  of  the  old.     I  am  looking  a  thousand  years 


274  The  New  Word 

ahead,  and  watching  other  generations  breaking 
asunder  other  swaddling  bands.  I  want  those  bands 
to  be  less  hard  to  break.  Hardmindedness  is  the 
particular  shape  of  Materialism  that  I  dislike  most, 
and  deem  to  be  the  greatest  foe  to  happiness.  If 
we  were  less  hardminded  towards  the  Man  Out- 
side, and  less  so  towards  ourselves,  it  would  follow 
that  we  should  be  less  so  towards  our  fellow  men. 
Unwillingness  to  learn  is  deafness  towards  the 
Man  Outside.  And  the  Deaf  are  no  other  than 
the  Dead. 


The  explorers  of  the  old  Egyptian  tombs  tell  us 
that  they  can  see  this  shadow  falling  across  the  val- 
ley of  the  Nile,  thousands  of  years  ago,  though 
whence  it  fell  is  still  obscure  to  them.  They  can  see 
the  dark  mist  of  Death-Worship  blotting  out  the  old 
happy  pictures  of  a  life  beyond  the  grave  not  unlike 
this  life,  and  replacing  them  by  monstrous  visions 
of  purgatory  and  judgment.  And  so  I  find  the  focus 
of  this  long  metastrophe  of  knowledge  in  the  Egyp- 
tian Pyramid,  itself  a  giant  Tomb. 

It  is  the  mightiest  building  upon  earth.  It  is  the 
greatest  monument  of  the  most  long-lasting  Medi- 
terranean Power.  Hundreds  of  thousands  of  lives 
were  sacrificed  in  building  it;  its  founder  went  to 
sleep  in  it,  wrapped  in  the  curse  of  mankind,  be- 
lieving that  he  had  secured  himself  an  everlasting 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  275 

death.  And  to-day  It  stands  empty;  there  is  no 
corpse  of  any  slave  huddled  into  the  sand,  till  the 
hyena  comes  to  scratch  it  up,  that  is  not  more  se- 
cure than  that  proud  Pharaoh. 

It  Is  an  astronomer's  building,  an  eternal  kalen- 
dar.  And  since  it  was  built,  the  very  pole  of  heaven 
has  shifted,  and  the  kalendar  has  been  thrice  re- 
formed. 

It  is  a  sermon  in  stone,  an  architectural  bible. 
And  it  has  witnessed  the  rise  and  fall  of  three  re- 
ligions, not  one  of  which  has  known  what  It  owed 
to  the  Masons  of  the  Pyramid. 

This  Delta  raised  In  three  dimensions  is  the  em- 
bodiment of  Pure  Measure;  the  Idol  of  Fixity;  the 
shell  of  Logic  and  Theology.  This  frozen  flame  Is 
the  perfect  Denial  of  Change. 

It  Is  the  Last  Word  of  the  Black  Man. 

Europe  has  got  this  Pyramid  upon  the  brain. 
Here  Is  the  ogre's  fortress,  and  not  In  any  mush- 
room city  on  the  Seven  Hills ;  and  here  a  foe  worthy 
of  the  White  Knight's  steel.  If  those  poor  mad 
Idealists  who  call  themselves  Anarchists  could  see 
this,  as  I  see  It,  they  would  leave  off  throwing  their 
bombs  at  better  Idealists  than  they  are.  They 
would  bring  their  bombs  here,  and  find  a  safer  cock- 
shy. They  will  break  their  teeth  before  they  do 
much  damage  to  old  Khufu. 

A  little  child  of  six  once  brought  me  a  toy  that 
had  been  screwed  fast,  and  asked  me  to  iint'ighten 
it.    There  was  a  new  word  not  to  be  found  In  any 


276  The  New  Word 

of  the  word-books;  the  child  made  it  for  himself; 
but  his  authority  is  good  enough  for  me.  I  am  not 
an  exact  philologist.  It  happens  to  be  the  very  word 
I  am  in  need  of  now.  For  I  also  am  an  anarchist, 
and  my  bomb  is  one  small  seed;  and  seeds  have  this 
strange  power  that  in  the  long-run  they  can  unlock 
the  mightiest  masonry.  Give  me  leave  to  sow  my 
seed  right  under  the  base  of  Khufu's  Pyramid,  and 
have  patience.     We  shall  untighten  it. 

Why  are  my  poor  mad  friends  in  such  a  hurry? 
Have  we  not  half  eternity  before  us? 

VI 

The  Pyramid,  according  to  philology,  has  no 
imaginary  Aryan  root,  nor  any  known  Egyptian 
one.  But  this  time  psychology  is  on  the  side  of  the 
imaginary  Aryans.  For  when  the  Greeks  gave 
the  word  the  spelling  which  we  still  use,  they  were 
thinking  of  their  own  pyre,  or  funeral  fire,  and 
dimly  or  clearly  recognising  in  the  pyramid  a  granite 
flame.  In  this  way  it  comes  about  that  he  who  has 
this  pyramid  upon  the  brain  is  rightly  called  a  Puri- 
tan. For  there  are  more  Rhymes  in  heaven  and 
earth  than  are  dreamt  of  by  etymology. 

Now,  as  I  have  said,  the  pyramid  is  the  Black 
man's  word,  and  it  does  no  harm  to  the  Black  man. 
When  the  Black  Puritan  takes  a  vow  of  celibacy, 
and  tortures  and  starves  himself  to  death  in  the 
lethal  chamber  of  the  monastery,  he  is  acting  for 
the  benefit  of  mankind,  and  doing  just  what  science 


Pathology:  The  Pyramid  277 

ought  to  wish  him  to  do.  I  hold  it  unscientific,  and 
I  am  sure  it  is  inhuman,  to  drag  him  out  of  his  own 
self-chosen  lethal  chamber,  and  put  him  into  some 
other  one  devised  by  us;  and  it  is  the  very  crime  of 
crimes  to  order  him  to  go  out  into  the  world  and 
beget  children,  for  us  to  torture  and  imprison  and 
lethalise  in  their  turn. 

The  Black  man  has  learnt  this  lesson  long  ago, 
and  he  can  worship  the  fakir  without  becoming  one. 

But  the  White  man's  natural  symbol  is  the  living 
flame,  and  not  the  granite  one.  He  is  a  raw  appren- 
tice in  fakir-worship,  and  a  blunderer.  And  so  the 
White  fakir  wants  to  make  every  one  else  a  fakir 
against  their  will;  and  he  takes  a  vow  of  marriage, 
that  he  may  beget  children  and  train  them  up  as 
fakirs.  That  is  his  mistake,  and  that  is  the  mistake 
to  be  set  right. 

The  White  fakir  is  less  thorough-going  than  the 
Black  fakir,  but  he  is  a  lesser  nuisance  to  himself 
in  order  that  he  may  be  a  greater  nuisance  to  his 
neighbours.  And  so  we  find  that  what  the  White 
man  has  gained  in  freedom  of  thought  he  has  lost 
in  freedom  of  action.  The  Puritan  thinks  what  he 
likes,  and  the  Catholic  does  what  he  likes,  like  the 
Prussians  and  Frederick  the  Great. 

The  Black  mind  seems  to  be  past  curing.  They 
that  are  sick  unto  death  need  not  a  physician.  It 
is  a  case  for  the  altruistic  principle  once  more.  I 
want  to  untighten  the  Puritan  brain,  because  I  think 
it  is  the  brain  of  a  good  man. 


NINETEENTH  HEAD 


THE  ECLIPSE 

The  New  Religion. — i.  White  and  Black. — 2.  Afri- 
can Tales. — 3.  The  End  of  the  World. — 4.  Prophecy, — 
5.     The  Heretic. 

"TTVIDENTLY  it  is  not  the  business  of  Idealism 
'■-'  to  furnish  mankind  with  a  new  religion. 

The  new  religion  is  already  with  us.  It  has  been 
with  us  for  some  hundreds  of  years.  It  is  no  longer 
struggling  for  a  footing.  It  is  partly  established 
by  law.  It  has  always  had  its  heretics,  and  it  has 
for  some  time  been  persecuting  them.  Men  are 
being  sent  to  jail  in  England,  while  I  write,  for 
fidelity  towards  Christianity,  and  infidelity  towards 
Science. 

The  old  religion  bade  men,  when  their  friends 
were  ill,  to  pray  to  the  Man  Outside  in  words.  The 
new  religion  bids  them  to  pray  in  drugs.  And 
when  they  obey  the  old  religion,  and  disobey  the 
new,  and  their  friends  happen  to  die,  the  law  sends 
them  to  prison. 

The  new  religion  has  won  its  way  over  the  old 
by  sheer  business  merit.  Its  spells  are  stronger 
than  those  of  the  old  religion.  They  work  better. 
They  bind  the  Man  Outside  more  surely.  The 
prayers   of  the   new  religion   are  more   often  an- 

278 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  279 

swered.  The  priests  of  the  old  religion  themselves 
have  learnt  that.  When  they  want  to  bind  the  Man 
Outside  not  to  strike  their  church  with  lightning, 
they  no  longer  trust  to  the  prayers  written  in  their 
book.  They  borrow  the  iron  prayer  of  Science; 
and  that  prayer  climbs  above  the  church;  and,  like 
a  trail  of  ivy,  sucks  the  strength  out  of  the  church. 

The  new  spells  are  stronger  than  the  old  spells 
because  they  are  braver.  They  do  not  treat  the 
Man  Outside  as  though  he  were  a  half-savage 
tyrant,  ruling  by  fits  and  starts,  and  swayed  this 
way  and  that  by  the  flatteries  of  his  courtiers. 
They  treat  him  as  a  Man  who,  on  the  whole,  knows 
his  own  mind,  and  means  us  to  know  it,  and  gives 
his  prizes  for  discernment  and  not  for  flattery. 
And  so  the  new  prayer  does  not  cast  itself  on  its 
knees  saying,-— "  Thy  will  be  done"  :  it  lifts  its  iron 
finger  to  the  skies  with  the  proud  challenge,— 
"Touch  me  if  you  can!" 

The  new  prayers  are  more  businesslike  than  the 
old,  because  they  are  written  to  please  the  Man 
Outside  and  not  the  Man  Inside.  And  they  use  the 
language  which  the  Man  Outside  seems  to  under- 
stand best,  the  language  of  deeds,  not  words. 

They  are  sincere  prayers.  They  ask  for  what 
men  really  want,  and  not  for  what  they  pretend  to 
want,  or  fear  the  Man  Outside  wants  them  to  want. 
Hence  they  are  not  so  often  put  up  out  of  vanity, 
and  so  as  to  be  heard  of  men,  as  the  old  prayers. 

Above  all  they  are  truthful  prayers.     They  are 


28o  The  New  Word 

not  attempts  to  hoodwink  the  Man  Outside.  The 
plumber  does  not  lay  down  a  dummy  drain,  and 
hope  the  Man  Outside  will  mistake  it  for  a  real 
drain.  He  may  break  the  sanitary  laws,  but  he 
does  not  think  he  can  break  the  Law  of  Health. 

And  the  new  prayers  have  all  these  merits  because 
they  try,  on  the  whole,  to  be  true  prayers.  Veri- 
hood  is  the  foundation  of  the  new  religion.  The 
Man  Outside  Is  revealing  himself  to  us  by  a  new 
name,  and  Verlhood  is  that  name. 

Between  these  two  religions  how  does  the  Ideal- 
ist stand? 


It  Is  significant  that  the  new  religion  comes  from 
the  North.  It  breathes  the  sheer  courage  and  in- 
tense love  of  life  of  those  old  Vikings  who  prayed 
to  die  In  battle,  and  not  a  cow's  death  on  the  straw. 
It  is  on  the  whole  the  rebellion  of  the  Baltic  against 
the  Mediterranean  mind. 

For  that  reason  the  Idealist  will  not  want  It  to 
end  in  the  harsh  conquest  of  the  Mediterranean  by 
the  Baltic  mind.  We  have  heard  too  much  of 
world  religions.  The  world  can  do  very  well  with- 
out another  Catholic  Church.  The  Northern  folk 
are  the  White  folk.  What  we  are  dealing  with  Is 
the  White  Man's  religion. 

By  one  of  those  Rhymes  which  the  seeing  eye  sees 
everywhere,  and  which  only  stupefy  the  stupid  eye, 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  281 

the  Papal  party  in  the  new  Rome  call  themselves 
the  Blacks.  Anyone  who  has  ever  lived  among  the 
real  Blacks,  in  the  land  of  the  Black  River,  can 
understand  why.  Europe,  as  I  have  said,  Is  an 
African  colony  conquered  from  Asia.  And  Chris- 
tendom has  been  its  reconquest  by  Africa,  a  great 
spiritual  jacquerie  not  yet  over,  so  that  more  than 
one  White  king  is  still  cowering  at  Canossa,  doing 
homage  to  that  Black  Caesar  out  of  the  Catacombs. 

As  I  have  said,  the  task  of  the  Idealist  is  not  only 
to  free  White  men  from  the  Black  religion,  but  to 
save  Black  men  from  the  White  religion. 

I  myself  spend  so  much  time  in  the  thirtieth  cen- 
tury that  the  latter  task  sometimes  seems  to  me  the 
most  pressing.  But  perhaps  the  two  tasks  are  really 
one  and  the  same. 


II 


Nothing  is  more  painful  and  bewildering  to  the 
White  mind  than  what  seems  to  it  the  reckless 
lying,  the  utter  indifference  to  verihood,  of  the 
Black  mind.  That  literature  of  the  Black  Age, 
those  legends  and  romances,  have  not  their  very 
names  become  our  words  for  falsehood;  by  a 
Roman  tale,  do  we  not  mean  a  tale  that  is  not  sup- 
posed to  be  true?  It  is  not  till  we  come  to  the  Ice- 
landic sagas  that  we  seem  to  find  men  making  any 
effort  at  all  to  tell  the  story  as  it  really  might  have 
happened. 


282  The  New  Word 

And  yet  all  the  time  the  fault  has  been  partly  our 
own.  There  has  been  a  misunderstanding.  We 
have  partly  mistaken  poetry  for  prose. 

All  these  old  Mediterranean  men  did  not  always 
mean  to  deceive.  The  man  who  wrote,  without  one 
doubt  or  hesitation, — "  They  called  his  name  Jesus 
that  the  prophecy  might  be  fulfilled:  They  shall 
call  his  name  Immanuel " — that  man  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  trying  to  deceive  anybody.  He  tells 
us  fairly  enough  what  the  prophecy  said,  and  what 
the  event  said.  He  thought  the  two  tallied,  and  so 
have  we  thought  down  to  the  present  day.  He 
wrote  in  his  sleep,  and  we  have  read  in  our  sleep. 
Now,  if  a  modern  reporter,  describing  a  christening, 
were  to  say  the  child  was  named  John  to  carry  out 
the  request  of  his  godfather  that  he  should  be 
named  Alfred,  we  should  see  the  discrepancy. 
Those  old  writers  and  readers  saw  no  discrepancy. 
And  so  they  put  forward  as  part  of  their  apology  a 
statement  that  the  modern  apologist  has  to  apolo- 
gise for.  Surely  it  is  using  bad  language  to  say  that 
the  old  apologists  were  trying  to  deceive  us.  As 
one  of  themselves  has  put  it,  they  deceived  them- 
selves, and  the  truth  was  not  in  them. 

The  grand  mistake  of  the  White  mind  has  been 
to  take  the  Black  mind  literally,  or  rather  to  mis- 
take Letters  for  Things.  The  old  painters  who 
painted  their  heroes  with  yellow  plates  around  their 
heads  did  not  mean  to  tell  us  that  they  really  went 
about  wearing  yellow  plates,  as  a  Frenchman  wears 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  283 

his  red  ribbon,  but  only  that  they  were  very  good 
men — that  they  deserved  to  wear  yellow  plates. 
The  White  mind  has  been  believing  that  the  yellow 
plates  were  really  there.  Now  it  has  been  much  the 
same  with  the  Roman  tales. 

I  have  before  me  a  Roman  tale,  a  fair  specimen 
of  the  Black  book.     It  is  called  the  "  Life  of  Saint 
Francis  Borgia,  S.  J.",  a  very  good  man,  related  to 
a  Pope  of  Rome  who  was  not  a  very  good  man 
It  is   published  in  the  Anglo-Irish  town   of   Dub 
lin,    and    it    bears    the    following    strange    inscrip 
tions: — ^^  Nihil  obstat.     Edwardus     Kelly,     S.     J. 
Cens.  Dep."  and  ''''Imprimatur.     Gulielmus,  Archie 
piscopus  Dublinensis,  Hiberniae  Primas."     We  see 
at  once  that  it  is  a  thoroughly  Mediterranean  book, 
about  fifteen  hundred  years  behind  the  times.     It 
tells  the  story  of  a  General  of  the  Jesuit  Society, 
who  had  the  good  fortune  to  be  deified  in  the  year 
1 67 1,  and  it  goes  on  to  say,— 

"  In  connection  with  this  occasion  there  is  an  inci- 
dent on  record  which  shows  how  deeply  God  resents 
an  affront  against  the  honour  of  his  faithful  serv- 
ants. In  a  remote  town  of  Spain  a  number  of 
persons  were  discussing  the  recent  canonisation,  and 
remarking  on  the  virtues  and  miracles  of  the  saint, 
when  an  unhappy  heretic,  overhearing  them,  ex- 
claimed— '  You  make  very  sure  that  the  famous 
Duke  of  Gandia  is  in  heaven,  in  spite  of  his  absurd 
superstitions  and  miracles;  rather  than  believe  it  I 
call  on  God  to  send  me  down  to  hell  this  moment, 


284  The  New  Word 

body  and  soul.'  Scarcely  had  the  blasphemy  passed 
his  lips  when  the  awe-stricken  and  terrified  behold- 
ers saw  the  fulfilment  of  his  impious  wish,  for  the 
earth  immediately  opened  beneath  his  feet,  and, 
engulphing  him  in  its  depths,  reclosed  for  ever  over 
him." 

Now  when  the  White  Man  reads  tales  like  that 
they  do  him  harm.  But  they  do  not  harm  Arch- 
bishop Gulielmus  and  Edwardus  Kelly,  S.  J.,  and 
their  friends.  They  understand  them.  All  that  is 
merely  their  Mediterranean  way  of  saying  that 
Francis  Borgia  was  a  very  good  man.  It  does  not 
help  us  to  think  any  better  of  this  worthy  Jesuit  to 
be  told  that  the  earth  opened  in  "  a  remote  town  " 
of  Spain,  and  that  a  Baltic-minded  man  disappeared 
into  the  bowels  of  our  planet;  but  it  helps  them. 
They  do  not  mean  that  if  we  should  speak  disre- 
spectfully of  Archbishop  Gulielmus  the  pavement 
of  Dublin  or  elsewhere  would  open  beneath  our  feet, 
and  engulph  us.  If  we  should  offer  £8,000,  or 
8,000  times  £8,000,000  to  Archbishop  Gulielmus 
on  condition  that  the  earth  should  open  in  some 
town  not  too  remote  to  have  a  name,  and  engulph 
an  unhappy  heretic,  he  would  answer  quite  fairly 
that  we  had  not  understood  his  little  book.  In  the 
same  way,  when  I  lived  in  Dublin,  my  Black  friends 
used  to  assure  me  that  this  very  Archbishop  Guliel- 
mus could,  if  he  wished,  strike  every  heretic  in  the 
city  dead.  I  am  not  sure  if  this  power  of  his  is  even 
limited  to  his  own  diocese,  but  in  any  case  it  Is  for- 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  285 

midable  enough.  Now  In  telling  me  that,  my 
friends  were  not  trying  to  deceive  me.  It  was  an 
African  tale,  that  was  all,  and  I  have  heard  tales 
like  it  since,  in  Africa.  My  friends  would  have 
been  quite  as  much  surprised  as  I,  if  the  archbishop 
really  had  struck  any  heretics  dead.  It  was  only 
their  African  way  of  saying  that  he  was  a  very  re- 
spectable man.  It  helped  them  to  respect  him,  to 
talk  like  that,  but  it  did  not  help  me. 

That  is  how,  I  think,  we  must  bring  ourselves  to 
regard  this  language  of  theirs.  It  seems  to  us  bad 
language,  but  the  meaning  is  not  always  bad.  I 
found  the  men  who  used  It  on  the  whole  very  good 
men.  I  even  found  some  of  them  very  tolerant 
men,  often  more  so  than  their  white  neighbours. 
Even  Archbishop  Gulielmus  is  tolerant,  because, 
after  all,  he  never  does  strike  anybody  dead.  He 
does  not  abuse  his  power. 

The  art  of  writing  truly  is  so  high  an  art,  so  far 
beyond  our  present  reach,  that  those  who  have 
essayed  it  most  will  think  most  charitably  of  the 
poor  Blacks  who  have  given  it  up. 


Ill 

As  soon  as  we  leave  off  reading  these  old  books 
as  If  they  were  newspapers  published  in  New  York, 
we  shall  begin  to  understand  them.  It  is  almost 
time,  indeed,  to  leave  off  refuting  and  apologising. 


286  The  New  Word 

and  to  begin  interpreting.  To  say  that  two  thou- 
sand years  ago  men  suddenly  went  out  of  their 
minds  and  began  mistaking  a  mosaic  of  Egyptian 
mythology  for  a  page  of  Josephus  may  be  true,  and 
yet  it  may  be  the  most  idle  thing  that  can  be  said 
about  Christianity.  Because  it  does  not  tell  us  why 
the  Mediterranean  mind  turned  inside  out. 

To-day  there  is  no  science  so  exact  as  astronomy. 
It  is  only  one  remove  from  Pure  Mathematics. 
The  very  Zodiac  has  been  nailed  to  the  sun,  as  far  as 
words  can  do  it,  so  that  we  still  speak  of  the  sun  as 
in  the  Sign  of  Aries,  while  he  is  actually  rising  in  the 
star-group  of  the  Fishes.  And  there  is  no  Cin- 
derella so  despised  as  astrology.  Darwin  has 
pointed  out  in  a  footnote  that  our  descent  from  the 
little  tidal  creature  called  the  Ascidian  may  account 
for  the  moon-pulse  in  all  warm-blooded  life.  But 
even  he  only  ventured  to  put  that  in  a  footnote, 
perhaps  for  fear  of  the  astronomers,  which  is  the 
key  to  astrology,  and  was  the  beginning  of 
astronomy. 

Exact  science  is  so  busy  with  her  exact  measures 
that  she  is  apt  to  turn  a  little  angrily  from  any 
attempt  to  apply  those  measures  for  the  material 
benefit  of  mankind.  But  for  the  old  astrologers 
the  measures  were  only  means  to  an  end.  They 
wanted  to  make  the  stars  useful.  These  Signs  of 
theirs  were  weather  signs.  They  did  not  know 
there  were  extinct  volcanoes  in  the  moon,  but  they 
knew    all    about    that    moon-pulse    in    themselves. 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  287 

Their  science,  like  our  science,  was  their  religion. 
And  thus  they  drew  no  hard  and  fast  line  between 
the  lore  of  heaven  and  the  lore  of  Heaven.  We 
see  they  could  not,  before  writing  was  invented. 

We  learn  from  their  mistakes.  We  see  them 
trying,  like  other  scientists,  to  be  too  exact.  They 
( tried  to  make  the  stars  work  overtime.  They  made 
their  picture  book  In  the  sky,  and  then  sought  to 
read  too  much  in  it,  mistaking  their  own  pothooks 
and  hangers  for  the  Cuneiform  of  God.  The 
strange  thing  is  that  they  did  not  always,  and  alto- 
gether, read  it  wrong. 

They  had  a  great  deal  of  trouble  with  the  stars. 
Those  stars  are  like  men,  they  will  not  always  go 
as  they  ought.  You  build  your  temple,  your  long 
stone  telescope,  pointing  to  where  a  star  ought  to 
rise,  and  lo !  after  a  thousand  years  or  so,  it  rises 
somewhere  else,  and  you  have  to  build  a  new  temple. 
But  what  is  this  greatest  change  of  all  ?  Lo ! 
Heaven  itself  is  on  the  move,  the  eternal  Picture- 
Book  is  turning  over  one  by  one  its  mighty  leaves, 
the  immortal  Sun  himself  after  two  thousand  years 
deserts  his  mansion  in  the  sky,  and  passes  from  Sign 
to  Sign. 

This  was  the  change  which  so  shook  the  mind  of 
those  old  learners  that  in  their  mystic  speech  they 
named  it  the  End  of  an  Age,  the  beginning  of  a 
New  Heaven  and  a  New  Earth.  And  when  their 
words  came  into  the  streets,  when  they  were  peddled 
in  chapbooks,  and  caught  up  by  every  sufferer  long- 


288  The  New  Word 

ing  for  better  things,  by  every  captive  in  a  dungeon 
and  by  every  slave  bleeding  under  the  lash,  and  by 
every  Idealist  dreaming  dreams  of  Righteousness, 
what  wonder  if  they  fulfilled  themselves. 

We  catch  the  echo  of  this  far-famed  prediction 
all  round  the  Mediterranean  shores.  Alexander 
thought  of  it.  Caesar  thought  of  it.  Plato  wrote 
of  it.  Virgil  wrote  of  it.  It  passed  from  Jewry 
Into  the  catacombs.  The  Book  of  Daniel  breathes 
of  It.  The  Book  of  Enoch  is  full  of  it.  The 
Apocalypse  is  it.  The  Roman  slaves  drew  the 
mysterious  Fish  of  the  New  Covenant  on  the 
ground  as  their  secret  password  long  before  any  one 
had  begun  to  draw  a  Cross.  When  they  were 
shown  that  its  Greek  name,  i-c-th-ti-s  was  an  acrostic 
on  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  had  nothing  more 
to  ask.  The  Sign  of  Jonah  had  been  given  to  them. 
The  early  Christians  were  called  Little  Fishes,  and 
the  early  preachers  Fishermen. 

What  strikes  me  under  it  all  is  that,  whatever 
words  they  used,  the  old  astrologers  were  right. 
Their  world  did  come  to  an  end. 

Before  their  time  the  White  man,  whom  we  know 
as  Zarathustra,  had  reached  the  first  great  gen- 
eralisation which  brought  order  out  of  the  chaos  of 
mythology.  He  had  polarised  idolatry  in  two  An- 
tagonists who  played  the  same  parts  as  our  Energy 
and  Force.  He  had  identified  them,  not  by  the 
words  Bright  and  Might,  but  as  the  Bright  One  and 
the  Dark  One.    And,  going  on  to  use  the  two  words 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  289 

that  seem  to  me  the  most  shifty  of  meaning  in  all 
human  speech,  he  had  declared  the  Bright  One  to 
be  Good,  and  the  Dark  One,  Evil.  His  theology 
was  the  theology  of  conquerors.  And  it  was  this 
theology  that  Christianity  overthrew.  It  was  the 
Bright  One  that  fell  from  Heaven,  and  was  bound 
for  a  thousand  years,  while  the  Dark  One  ascended 
into  Heaven,  and  reigned  during  the  Dark  Age. 

It  was  metastrophe.  It  was  hope  turning  inside 
out. 

The  world  did  end.  That  old,  bright  pagan 
world  did  end.  The  old  Gods  vanished  from  their 
Olympus.  The  oracles  grew  dumb.  The  great 
Pan  lay  dead.  We  can  see  men  sinking  down  and 
falling  asleep  all  round  the  coasts  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean Sea.  We  see  the  rulers  drooping,  and  weary- 
ing of  their  task.  We  see  the  scholars  ceasing  to 
write,  and  the  soldiers  ceasing  to  fight.  We  see  the 
hunted  slaves  creeping  out  of  their  sewers  with  their 
old  mysteries  and  shocking  rites.  The  books  of 
science  are  burned.  The  schools  are  closed.  The 
Idiots  put  down  the  Gnostics.  The  beautiful  litera- 
ture is  lost,  or  scrawled  over  with  senseless  legends 
that  read  like  the  talk  of  men  in  a  nightmare.  We 
see  the  Northern  folks  descending  on  the  exhausted 
southern  lands,  only  to  fall  under  the  spell.  It  is 
the  Gospel — God's  Spell.  The  mind  of  man  has 
turned  inside  out.  It  is  the  Reign  of  the  Saints. 
The  world  has  gone  to  sleep  for  a  thousand  years. 
It  is  Ragnarok — the  Twilight  of  the  Gods. 


290  The  New  Word 

We  have  been  living  in  the  New  Jerusalem  while 
the  Millennium  has  come  and  gone. 


IV 


The  words  of  the  old  prophets  seem  senseless 
enough  to  us,  but  so  did  other  hieroglyphs  till 
Champollion  had  found  the  key.  And  neither  did 
the  priests,  nor  did  the  prophets,  write  all  they 
knew.  Neither  were  they  able  to  do  so;  neither  is 
any  man  able  to  write  all  he  knows. 

Somehow  or  other,  it  seems  to  me  that  those  as- 
trologers were  weather-wise,  that  they  foreknew 
that  millennial  ebb  and  flow  of  heat  and  light  that 
was  to  dry  up  Lake  Tchad  and  unfreeze  the  Baltic; 
that  giant  tidal  wave  in  the  sun  that  was  to  sweep 
the  empire  of  Rome  before  it  like  an  egg-shell,  and 
wash  up  the  wreckage  of  Thebes  and  Babel  on  the 
shores  of  Scandinavia.  Their  memorable  prophecy 
has  been  memorably  fulfilled. 

Some  day  we  may  be  able  to  see  in  this  the  hand- 
writing of  the  Man  Outside,  and  to  take  to  heart 
the  tremendous  Lesson.  Some  day  we  may  be  al- 
lowed to  show  the  apologists  for  Christianity  the 
meaning  of  the  word  Christ. 

In  the  meantime  the  pressing  business  seems  to  be 
to  prevent  the  new  shell  from  hardening. 

And  it  is  hardening  very  fast.  The  new  religion 
Is  to-day  much  more  sure  of  itself  than  the  old  re- 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  291 

llglon,  much  more  positive,  more  catholic, — In  a 
word,  more  materialistic.  It  has  already  taken  over 
the  word  faith. 

"  By  faith,"  cries  a  distinguished  prophet  of  the 
new  religion,  who  prophesies  in  wheels  and  gases,  in 
the  machine,  the  triangle  and  the  lethal  chamber, — 
"  by  faith  we  disbelieve !  "  And  what  Is  It  that  the 
Materialist  so  heroically  disbelieves?  It  is  the  evi- 
dence of  his  senses. 

Out  of  the  millions  of  waves  forever  flowing  in 
and  out  of  us  from  the  Strength  Without,  whose 
best  name  is  Heaven,  our  little  strength-conductors 
gather  a  few  here  and  there  to  keep  the  body  safe, 
and  from  these  few  we  try  to  piece  together  a  Mean- 
ing by  which  we  can  live,  as  the  bird  pieces  together 
sticks  and  straws  to  make  Itself  a  nest.  But  the 
bird's  nest  Is  not  the  dome  of  Saint  Sophia.  There 
are  other  senses  than  the  celebrated  five  of  Alexan- 
drian lore;  and  the  Siberian  shaman  in  his  swoon, 
the  dervish  In  his  dance,  the  animal  in  its  sleep,  the 
very  trees  and  flowers,  feel  v/aves  that  we  have  left 
off  feeling,  and  know  what  we  have  forgotten  how 
to  know.  With  us  sight  has  killed  second-sight. 
The  Past  is  too  much  with  us;  and  the  Future  not 
enough. 

If  we  will  think  roundly  and  speak  sensibly,  we 
shall  know  that  the  Beyond  is  not  less  real  than  the 
Near,  the  Future  not  less  real  than  the  Past.  It  is 
the  Present  that  is  unreal,  a  meeting-point  only;  and 
in  these  lives  of  ours  the  metastrophe  of  Future  and 


292  The  New  Word 

Past    becomes    the    metastrophe    of    Hope    and 
Memory. 

Are  we  nothing  but  a  makeshift  between  Heredity 
and  Environment?  But  Hope  is  the  greatest  part 
of  our  environment.  It  is  the  Pull  of  Heaven.  It 
is  the  Energy  of  Longing.  It  is  the  Swirl.  The 
story  of  creation  that  tries  to  leave  out  hope  will 
leave  out  sense  unawares.  For  the  environment  of 
Earth  is  Heaven. 


The  Idealist  cannot  halt  between  the  old  and  new 
religions.     His  face  is  turned  ever  towards  the  east. 

The  new  religion  is  his;  because  he  foresaw  it,  he 
foretold  it,  he  founded  it,  he  witnessed  for  it,  in 
bonds  and  in  death,  what  time  the  very  men  who 
are  now  persecuting  Christians  were  persecuting 
Scientists,  and  they  who  are  now  carving  beasts  for 
Man's  sake,  were  torturing  men  for  God's  sake. 
But  the  prophet  of  a  new  religion  cannot  be  also  its 
priest.  As  it  becomes  orthodox,  so  he  will  become 
heterodox.  Because  the  Idealist  founded  the  new 
religion  it  will  excommunicate  him. 

Let  there  be  no  mistake  about  this.  The  Idealist 
may  build  temples;  he  does  not  dwell  in  them.  He 
is  never  an  archbishop ;  he  remains  ever  the  prophet. 
To  mankind — and  let  us  believe  for  the  material 
benefit  of  mankind,  or  let  us  believe  the  All-Thing 
an  everlasting  Hoax — the  Idealist  is  always  saying 


Astrology:  The  Eclipse  293 

what  Remlglus  said  to  the  Prankish  king,—"  Burn 
what  you  have  learned;  learn  what  you  have 
burned." 

Who  can  make  him  an  archbishop?  Who  can 
patronise  the  Idealist,  except  some  greater  Idealist? 
England  will  always  have  fifteen  thousand  a  year 
for  some  respectable  clergyman;  she  will  never  have 
it  for  Shelley  or  Carlyle. 

The  Idealist  on  his  side  knows  what  he  has  to  ex- 
pect of  mankind.  The  crucifix  set  up  at  the  en- 
trance to  every  Catholic  village,  Lamartine  has  writ- 
ten, is  Humanity's  warning  to  the  Idealist, — a  warn- 
ing given  in  vain : 

"  We  know  the  price,  and  yet  our  gifts  we  strew, 
Our  Hfeblood  and  our  tears  to  feed  the  lamp 
God  orders  us  to  bear  in  front  of  you." 

In  our  sun-whirl  there  is  one  planet  which  has  a 
moon  which  is  turning  the  other  way.  And  if  it  be 
strong  enough,  and  last  long  enough,  sooner  or  later 
the  whole  mighty  Wheel  of  Light  will  return  and 
follow  that  one  little  moon.  There  is  the  home  of 
the  homeless  Idealist,  in  that  far-off  spot  his  van- 
tage-ground; that  moon  is  his  fiery  chariot.  For 
here  he  has  no  continuing  city,  but  he  seeks  one  to 
come. 


TWENTIETH    HEAD 


THE   BOOK  OF  ETIQUETTE 

Translation. — i.  The  Energy  of  Longing. — 2.  Dia- 
gram of  Life. — 3.  The  Art  of  Living. — 4.  Groundless 
Fear. — 5.  Ethical  Sing-song. — 6.  The  New  Churchy — 
7-     The  Unknown  God. 

"D  Y  this  time  the  Testator's  word  has  so  far  un- 
folded  that  we  are  able  to  see  somewhat  of  his 
meaning. 

The  Swedish  word  for  ideal  seems  to  be  hbpp, 
the  English  hope,  and  a  work  of  an  idealist  tendency 
to  be  neither  more  nor  less  than  a  hopeful  work. 


A  hope  differs  from  a  thought,  and  an  ideal  from 
an  idea,  in  that  it  has  a  tendency.  It  has  going 
strength.  It  is  not  the  builder's  plan,  but  rather  the 
householder's  desire,  of  which  the  house  is  in  some 
measure  the  fulfilment.  It  is  indefinite  because 
strength  is  indefinite,  and  if  it  were  definite  it  would 
be  dead. 

Hope  is  a  term  of  strength,  like  energy;  it  may 
be  called  the  energy  of  longing.  The  children  call 
it  looking  forward,  which  is  the  very  etymology  of 
idealist.  It  is  by  metaphor  that  we  speak  of  a  hope, 
or  an  ideal.  That  is  an  abstract  word  used  as  the 
name   for  an   imaginary  point  towards  which  the 

«94 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette        295 

energy  of  longing  works,  and,  as  we  have  seen, 
it  is  an  extreme  point  and  an  extravagant  one.  To 
fix  the  mind  on  this  imaginary  point  instead  of  on 
the  real  strength  is  a  cardinal  error,  and  to  refute 
it  has  been  my  first  care  in  this  interpretation.  For 
the  sound  mind,  the  only  real  point  is  the  Man  In- 
side, whose  circumference  is  the  Man  Outside;  and 
the  way  of  strength  which  is  called  Hope  works  be- 
tween them. 

All  strength  turns  inside  out,  and  we  try  to  follow 
it  with  our  names.  The  strength  which  leaves  the 
sun  as  energy  of  light  is  called  force  of  attraction 
whenas  it  leads  the  plant  out  of  the  soil,  and  the 
flower  out  of  the  plant;  and  again,  within  the 
flower,  it  is  called  energy  of  growth.  Man  is  the 
flower  and  not  the  sun,  and  the  attraction  which 
leads  the  man  out  of  the  beast,  and  the  angel  out  of 
the  man,  is  known  to  himself  as  longing,  or  hope. 

I  have  tried  to  show  that  this  way  of  strength  is 
as  real  as  the  force  of  gravitation.  The  swirl  is  the 
mathematical  demonstration  of  hope,  and  the  uni- 
verse is  the  mathematical  demonstration  of  the 
swirl.  For  there  is  an  annex  to  the  universe;  but 
it  is  not  built  of  words  only,  and  it  does  not  stand 
empty,  but  in  it  there  abides  an  immortal  Guest, 
whose  name  is  Hope. 

The  Way  of  hope  is  marked  off  from  the  Way 
called  heredity  as  the  pull  is  marked  off  from  the 
push.  We  are  led  as  well  as  driven.  Hope 
wrestles  with  heredity  in  the  shaping  of  life,  and 


296  The  New  Word 

evolution  is  the  triumph  of  hope  over  heredity.  To 
say  otherwise  were  to  say  that  there  is  no  growth, 
and  no  life. 

Hope,  therefore,  must  be  half  of  the  true  story 
of  creation.  Beyond  the  struggle  for  existence  is 
the  struggle  for  a  better  existence.  The  survival  of 
the  fittest  turns  out  to  be  the  survival  of  the  fore- 
most, which  is  the  creation  of  a  higher  type.  The 
fittest  for  the  past  is  not  the  fittest  for  the  future, 
and  it  is  the  fittest  for  the  future  who  is  the  elect  of 
Hope.  The  Tree  of  Life  grows  upward,  and  it  is 
the  breath  of  life  that  has  changed  up  into  hope. 

II 

In  its  full  meaning  the  word  hope  may  be  made 
to  cover  all  man's  work.  It  is  hope  that  leads  the 
veriest  Materialist  to  learn  from  sense,  and  hope 
that  turns  the  lesson  to  use  for  mankind's  benefit. 
Nothing'  is  so  practical  as  hope.  History  itself  is 
only  busy  idleness  unless  it  can  turn  into  prophecy. 

But  though  hope  spreads  out  fan-wise,  instead  of 
narrowing  to  a  point,  the  Testator  has  clearly  out- 
lined the  department  of  hope  which  he  meant  to  en- 
dow. The  Idealist  is  placed  by  him  between  the 
scientific  discoverer  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  prac- 
tical pioneer  of  kindness  on  the  other,  both  working 
for  the  benefit  of  mankind.  Between  these  two  the 
Idealist  stands  like  an  interpreter,  whose  business  it 
should  be  to  turn  the  lessons  of  science  into  rules  of 
behaviour. 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette        297 

Idealism  Is  first  of  all  the  science  of  hope,  learn- 
ing the  will  of  Heaven  from  the  voice  within,  as 
Materialism  learns  It  from  the  voice  without.  So 
far  as  I  can  look  Into  the  mind  of  the  Testator  he 
sought  in  these  two  sciences,  not  a  contradiction,  but 
a  collaboration,  like  that  of  the  centripetal  and  cen- 
trifugal forces  which  are  supposed  to  guide  a  planet 
In  Its  course.  This  may  be  illustrated  by  a  simple 
diagram : 


>X 

-Px 

.JC>X 

,<^* 

s 

A,VV 

U) 

01 

/ 

•M 

Q. 

/ 

5P 

0 

/ 

0^ 

•0 

X 

/ 

Materialism 

Sense 


The  science  of  hope  is  languishing  to-day,  and  I 
have  thought  it  not  the  least  part  of  this  inquiry  to 
Investigate  the  causes  of  this  aberration,  and  sug- 


298  The  New  Word 

gest  a  remedy.  Its  chairs  are  filled,  and  its  endow- 
ments are  embezzled,  by  men  who  are  still  living  in 
the  Dark  Age.  They  are  good  men,  or  so  I  like  to 
think,  but  their  work  is  not  good,  and  they  are 
blocking  the  way  of  better  men.  They  seem  to  me 
like  old  women  who  should  stand  round  a  burning 
house  with  pails  in  their  hands,  faithfully  throwing 
their  paltry  dribble  on  the  flames,  but  keeping  back 
the  engine  which  alone  can  put  out  the  fire.  This 
legacy  is  certainly  not  meant  for  them.  It  is  a  sum- 
mons to  the  firemen. 

That  seems  to  me  the  whole  point.  Here  is  not 
a  prize  for  a  new  religion,  for  what  is  called  science 
is  the  new  religion.  But  here  is  a  prize  for  a  new 
hope,  and  it  would  not  have  been  offered  if  the  old 
hope  were  still  strong  and  bright. 

My  chief  end  in  this  inquiry  has  been  to  show 
that  this  at  bottom  is  a  question  of  words,  but  to 
show  at  the  same  time  that  that  does  not  lessen  the 
importance  of  the  question;  because  words  are  the 
signposts  of  hope.  If  the  weathervane  be  stuck 
fast  and  useless,  the  wind  will  still  blow,  but  that 
is  no  excuse  for  the  weathervane.  I  have  tried 
to  show  that  the  old  words  are  outlandish  words, 
as  well  as  out-of-date  words,  and  to  point  to  where 
better  words  may  be  found.  The  folk-lore  of  the 
Black  man  has  had  a  long  innings  in  the  North,  and 
it  is  time  to  give  the  White  man's  folk-lore  a  turn. 
It  is  only  my  own  judgment,  but  it  is  one  not  lightly 
nor  hastily   formed;  and  I   think  th'at  the  secret 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette         299 

lies  here,  and  that  this  is  the  remedy  for  hope's 
disease. 

It  is  a  very  gradual  remedy,  and  that  is  why  I 
hope  so  much  from  it.  Before  this  Will  can  be  fully 
carried  out,  before  we  can  have  truly  hopeful  works 
competing  with  one  another  for  this  Prize,  we  must 
have  a  generation,  perhaps  several  generations,  of 
writers  who  have  been  brought  up  on  truth,  and 
encouraged  to  write  truthfully.  For  it  is  verihood 
that  is  difficult, — hope  comes  of  its  own  accord 
wherever  it  has  leave.  But,  to  begin  with,  the  mind 
must  have  light  and  air  and  freedom.  The  ban- 
dages must  be  taken  off  the  brain.  The  laws  against 
hope  must  be  repealed. 

The  Idealist  of  our  day  works  like  the  medieval 
alchemist  by  stealth  and  in  dread  of  men,  and  his 
books  are  not  sound  and  sensible.  In  the  last  gener- 
ation an  admired  idealist  wrote  many  books  in  praise 
of  medieval  churches  and  medieval  manners  and 
medieval  hopes.  Had  this  admired  writer  thor- 
oughly asked  himself  the  question, — To  what  end  do 
we  build  to-day;  what  is  our  best  hope;  and  in  what 
building  may  we  express  it  best? — had  he  gone  to 
work  in  that  spirit,  then,  although  his  search  had 
ended  in  the  bottom  of  a  drain,  he  might  have 
helped  his  fellows  to  build  a  better  drain,  and  been 
not  a  preacher  but  a  teacher. 

On  this  head  the  Testator  has  left  us  in  no  doubt, 
that  he  did  not  want  works  of  a  useless  tendency. 
He  did  not  want  beautiful  words  about  hope,  nor 


300  The  New  Word 

words  that  would  go  round  and  round  hope,  but 
words  that  would  help  men  to  hope,  and  by  helping 
them  to  hope,  help  them  to  live. 

Ill 

The  Art  of  life  is  that  high  art  which  children 
name  Behaviour,  and  as  art  is  the  end  of  science, 
so  beautiful  behaviour  is  the  end  of  hope.  If  it 
were  not  so,  Nobel  would  not  have  wasted  his  money 
on  Idealism,  nor  I  my  labour.  Here  is  the  highest 
and  most  difficult  art  in  the  world,  and  yet  the  one 
in  which  each  is  called  to  be  an  artist;  the  art  which 
any  man,  in  any  walk  of  life,  may  excel  in,  but  in 
which  no  man  may  achieve  perfection.  Not  even 
K'ung  the  Master  achieved  perfection,  if  he  is  now 
worshipped  alongside  of  Heaven.  Not  even  the 
Buddha  achieved  perfection,  If  the  Gods  in  Heaven 
now  worship  him. 

When  I  look  around  me,  and  see  so  many  men 
and  women,  of  such  differing  creeds,  of  such  vary- 
ing degrees  of  knowledge,  and  under  such  manifold 
temptations,  all  trying  to  behave  as  well  as  their 
infirmities  will  let  them,  and  behaving  so  much  bet- 
ter than  myself,  I  feel  it  is  almost  unkind  to  quarrel 
with  them  because  their  words  are  so  much  uglier 
than  their  deeds. 

And  yet  nowhere,  perhaps,  are  Andronican  words 
much  worse  than  in  Talk  about  Behaviour,  and  no- 
where  are  they  more   heedlessly  flung  out.     The 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette         301 

word  Love  is  the  most  dangerous  in  the  dictionary. 
If  we  should  ask  any  Christian  to  tell  us  the  key- 
word of  his  religion,  he  would  answer, — Love.  And 
if  we  should  ask  any  other  man  what  religion  had 
engendered  the  most  hatred,  he  would  answer, — 
Christianity.  If  those  who  use  this  word  so  reck- 
lessly would  keep  in  mind  that  love  and  hate  are  in 
metastrophe;  that  the  more  they  are  loving  in  one 
direction,  the  more  they  are  hating  in  another,  and 
that  it  is  hard  for  them  to  help  one  man  without 
hurting  another;  if  before  they  set  out  on  those  cru- 
sades of  theirs,  they  would  ask  themselves, — To 
whom  am  I  going  to  be  cruel? — how  much  more 
gentle  their  behaviour  might  become. 

Again,  as  I  walk  through  this  world  I  hear  going 
up  from  many  earnest  souls  the  cry, — Tell  us  how  to 
behave!  Teach  us  the  Rule  of  Right!  Make  us 
a  Moral  Code ! — And,  unhappily  as  they  think,  hap- 
pily as  I  think,  no  one  knows  quite  how  to  behave; 
there  is  no  Rule  of  Right;  the  Moral  Code  cannot  be 
made.  Not  even  the  lawyers,  with  their  magical 
sum  of  money,  can  make  it;  how  much  less  then  the 
mere  moral  philosophers  and  ethic-mongers,  "who 
have  not  even  a  Court. 

The  kindest  saying  I  have  found  in  all  the  words 
of  men  is  this: — One  man's  meat  is  another  man's 
poison.  That  is  the  idealist  rule:  not — Do  unto 
others  as  you  would  that  they  should  do  unto  you; 
but — Do  unto  others  as  they  would  have  you  do  un- 
to them. 


302  The  New  Word 

Each  of  us  has  his  own  Moral  Code,  and  makes 
it  as  he  goes  along,  and  changes  it  as  his  mind 
changes  and  grows.  We  know  that  the  perfect 
Moneymaker  will  kill  any  one  for  a  dollar,  but  that 
he  makes  an  admirable  Sunday-school  teacher.  We 
know  that  the  perfect  Idealist  would  make  a  poor 
policeman,  but  that  if  you  were  to  set  down  a  bag  of 
gold  on  the  desk  In  front  of  him,  and  afterwards 
take  it  away  again,  he  would  hardly  notice  what  you 
were  doing. 

It  is  not  well  to  be  troubled  over  much  even  about 
behaviour.  It  is  good  for  us  sometimes  to  think 
that  our  behaviour  does  not  matter  very  much  to  any 
one  besides  ourselves.  The  stars  go  on  shining  very 
steadily,  summer  and  winter  follow  one  another, 
the  flowers  spring  up  in  their  season,  and  the  song- 
birds carol  in  the  sky. 

IV 

Why  Is  It  that,  while  I  see  everywhere  around  me 
men  whose  manners  are  better  than  their  words,  yet 
they  are  all  anxious  to  persuade  me  that  it  is  the 
words  that  bring  about  the  good  manners?  The 
astrologers  seem  to  have  persuaded  them  that  a  re- 
form of  the  kalendar  will  be  followed  by  bloodshed 
In  the  streets. 

Much  of  this  seems  to  be  the  backwash  of  the 
great  French  Revolution.  The  educated  European 
mind  has  been  marking  time  for  a  hundred  years, 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette         303 

out  of  fear  of  the  mob.  Frederick  of  Prussia, 
Catherine  of  Russia,  that  strange,  ill-starred  Idealist 
on  a  throne  who  founded  the  Swedish  Academy, 
were  all  more  enlightened  than  kings  have  ventured 
to  be  since.  The  Revolution  frightened  the  rich. 
And  the  astrologers  have  seen  their  opportunity. 
They  have  persuaded  the  poor  rich  men  that  that 
great  jacquerie  was  a  scientific  orgy.  There  were 
no  starving  serfs  up  and  down  France.  There  were 
no  heartless,  worthless  lords.  There  was  no  bank- 
rupt, foolish  king.  There  was  no  Bastille  for  ideal- 
ists; and  no  Idealist  named  Rousseau.  The  king- 
ship did  not  bring  the  kingdom  to  utter  wreck,  and 
then  call  in  a  desperate  mob  to  put  things  straight 
for  It.  The  old  regime  did  not  commit  suicide.  No; 
all  that  Is  a  mistake.  There  was  a  wit  named  Vol- 
taire, and  he  was  allowed  to  say  witty  things  about 
the  astrologers,  and  because  of  that  the  mob  rose 
and  cut  the  rich  men's  throats. — And  because  of 
that  Mammon  to-day  sits  on  guard,  with  his  Mass- 
book  In  one  hand,  and  his  Maxim  in  the  other, 
watching  for  Truth  as  a  terrier  watches  for  a  rat. 
The  policy  of  the  poor,  frightened  rich  men  Is 
the  policy  of  the  ostrich.  They  build  their  churches, 
and  patch  up  their  cathedrals,  and  hire  respectable 
clergymen  at  enormous  salaries  to  make-believe  that 
the  earth  Is  flat, — and  meanwhile  Columbus  has  dis- 
covered the  new  world,  and  Copernicus  has  discov- 
ered the  sun,  and  Darwin  has  discovered  life.  And 
not  one  of  the  poor  rich  men  is  a  penny  the  worse. 


304  The  New  Word 

Their  fear  Is  groundless.  No  one  wants  to  cut 
their  throats.  No  one  wants  to  rob  them.  The 
Socialist  wants  them  to  pay  their  poor-rate,  and  by 
withholding  it  they  create  Socialism.  The  poor  man 
asked  them  for  bread,  and  they  have  given  him  a 
vote;  and  now  they  must  pay  in  taxes  more  than 
they  refused  as  alms.  The  Idealist  is  not  thinking 
of  their  gold  at  all.  He  is  not  asking  bread  but 
freedom.     And  Hope  is  a  dangerous  prisoner. 

On  the  whole  there  never  has  been  a  time  during 
the  last  two  thousand  years  when  the  astrology  had 
so  little  real  hold  on  men's  minds  as  it  has  to-day, 
and  there  never  has  been  a  time  when  the  behaviour 
of  men  towards  one  another  was  on  the  whole  so 
good.  The  untightening  of  dogma  and  the  better- 
ing of  behaviour  have  pretty  nearly  kept  pace  to- 
gether. And  a  hundred  years  after  the  French 
Revolution  a  White  folk,  called  on  to  choose  be- 
tween kingship  and  commonwealth,  have  chosen 
kingship. 

Who  was  the  first  to  write  under  words  like — 
"The  kingdom  of  heaven  Is  within  your  own 
hearts" — the  label  "Poetry" ;  and  under  words  like 
— "Where  the  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched  " — the  label  "  Exact  Geography  "  ?  The 
story  of  the  Good  Samaritan  is  not  an  astrological 
myth.  The  good  seed  of  the  Idealist  has  been 
choked  by  the  astrologer's  tares. 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette        305 


There  Is  a  slang  word  in  use  among  us,  cant, 
which  seems  to  be  in  English  sing-song.  It  is  our 
old  enemy  the  magic  spell,  but  in  its  dotage,  and 
grown  too  feeble  to  withstand  any  searching  test. 
It  is  more  beloved  in  England  than  in  any  other 
country  in  the  world,  and  for  that  very  reason.  The 
English  are  a  practical  people,  and  the  spell  that 
gives  way  most  readily  before  a  sum  of  money  is 
the  one  that  suits  them  best.  It  is  not  easy  for  for- 
eigners to  understand  the  English  character.  You 
think  that  they  are  fighting  to  the  death  over 
whether  their  children  shall  be  taught  the  gospel 
according  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  or  the  gospel  accord- 
ing to  the  London  County  Council;  but  when  you 
go  among  them,  you  find  that  they  do  not  mind 
what  their  children  are  taught,  so  long  as  they  do 
not  have  to  pay  for  it;  that  the  whole  quarrel  is 
over  that;  and  that  quite  a  number  of  them  are 
cheerfully  sending  their  children  to  schools  opened 
by  the  cast-out  monks  and  nuns  of  other  countries, 
to  be  taught  the  gospel  according  to  Ignatius 
Loyola. 

Let  us  see  if  we  can  talk  about  behaviour  without 
dropping  into  sing-song. 

It  seems  to  be  true  that  there  is  hardly  anything, 
from  mother-slaying  down  to  Sabbath-breaking, 
which  one  man  at  one  time  thinks  to  be  right,  which 


3o6  The  New  Word 

another  man  at  another  time,  or  even  at  the  same 
time,  does  not  think  to  be  wrong.  I  cannot  think 
of  anything  which  is  to-day  in  one  country  punished 
as  a  crime  which  has  not  been  yesterday,  or  in  an- 
other country,  practised  as  a  virtue  and  preached  as 
a  religion.  In  our  own  time  and  country,  while 
every  one  repeats  the  same  moral  Hie  haec  hoc,  each 
one  interprets  it  to  please  himself,  and  keeps  it  or 
breaks  it  as  his  wishes  prevail  over  his  fears. 

In  order  to  learn  how  men  really  feel  about  be- 
haviour there  seems  to  be  no  way  open  but  to  look 
past  what  they  are  saying  to  what  they  are  doing. 
And  accordingly,  when  I  wish  to  find  a  moral  code 
that  really  is  believed  in  and  obeyed,  when  I  want 
to  find  the  true  Levitical  law  of  the  age,  I  have  to 
put  on  one  side  all  the  Ethical  masterpieces,  all  the 
tomes  of  Moral  Philosophy,  all  the  sermons  and 
the  tracts,  and  to  begin  with  a  very  humble,  and 
not  at  all  distinguished,  treatise  calling  itself  the 
Book  of  Etiquette. 

The  Book  of  Etiquette  is,  according  to  its  lights, 
the  book  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  be- 
haviour. It  is  wonderfully  free  from  sing-song.  It 
does  not  use  many  Andronican  words.  It  does  not 
take  high  ground  with  its  readers;  it  only  tells  them 
how  they  must  behave  if  they  wish  to  be  thought 
ladies  and  gentlemen.  It  utters  no  threats;  it  holds 
up  no  punishments.  And  yet  I  find  there  is  no  law- 
giver so  willingly  obeyed  as  the  lawgiver  who  writes 
this  little  book.     When  must  I  call  on  my  friends; 


Ethics:  The  Book  of  Etiquette         307 

how  many  cards  must  I  leave;  how  many  minutes 
must  I  stay? — such  are  the  things  I  may  learn,  if 
I  will,  from  this  remarkable  book. 

The  Blook  of  Etiquette  is  sometimes  sneered  at 
for  teaching  its  readers  to  ape  their  betters.  But  I 
see  nothing  to  sneer  at;  and  to  ape  our  betters  seems 
to  me  a  very  beautiful  thing  to  do,  and  a  very  touch- 
ing thing;  and  I  would  far  rather  see  my  fellows 
anxious  to  be  thought  ladies  and  gentlemen,  than 
hear  them  using  words  like  Humanity  and  Brother- 
hood. I  find  nothing  about  bombs  in  the  Book  of 
Etiquette.  And  if  the  people  of  England  should 
ever  look  at  it  from  my  point  of  view,  they  will 
sink  their  differences  about  Queen  Elizabeth,  and 
begin  from  the  beginning  with  the  Book  of  Beauti- 
ful Behaviour. 

For  it  is  a  work  of  a  hopeful  tendency. 


VI 


There  have  been  times  when  I  have  been  tempted 
to  join  those  good  men  who  are  trying  to  reform 
the  Church.  And  then  again  I  have  looked  at  that 
lightning  conductor,  and  seen  that  it  was  reforming 
the  church  faster  than  any  words  of  theirs  or  mine 
could  do.  In  the  end  I  have  looked  round  me  and 
found  growing  up  unawares  the  New  Church. 

The  Club  is  to  the  Book  of  Etiquette  what  the 
Church  was  to  theology.    It  is  the  real  thing  instead 


3o8  The  New  Word 

of  the  explanation,  the  house  and  not  the  plan.  If 
we  wish  to  learn  how  men  feel  about  behaviour  to- 
day, we  must  go  to  the  clubs.  They  are  the  (Ecu- 
menical Council  of  our  time,  with  power  to  bless 
and  to  curse.  No  one  any  longer  minds  being  ex- 
communicated by  this  or  that  clerical  authority,  but 
everybody  minds  being  expelled  by  his  club.  The 
old  priesthood  no  longer  dares  to  beard  the  sinner 
by  name,  if  he  live  any  nearer  than  Constantinople. 
The  new  priesthood  takes  the  sinner  by  the  scruff 
of  his  neck,  and  thrusts  him  out. 

The  new  Church  does  not  deal  in  Andronlcan 
language.  All  its  theology  and  ethics  are  summed 
up  in  the  two  short  words — Good  Form.  And  per- 
haps those  are  the  only  ethical  words  in  use  among 
us  which  are  never  sing-song.  So,  while  the  moral 
philosophers  are  writing  their  moral  codes,  and  the 
teachers  of  ethics  are  piling  up  their  Mediterranean 
words,  the  clubs  have  quietly  got  hold  of  their  own 
unwritten  code,  and  are  shaping  mankind  by  it. 

Now  the  grand  merit  which  I  find  In  this  new 
church  is  that  it  is  not  a  catholic  church.  It  is  the 
other  way  about.  It  is  the  Exclusive  Church.  It 
does  not  force  the  sinner  and  the  dissenter  to  come 
in,  but  tries  its  very  hardest  to  keep  them  outside. 
And  In  that  I  find  more  hope  for  mankind  than  in 
any  other  observation  I  have  made  since  I  came  to 
live  among  them. 

When  we  have  laid  the  lesson  of  the  Club  to 
heart,  the  world  will  be  changed.     We  shall  no 


Ethics:  The  'Book  of  Etiquette        309 

longer  try  to  take  the  Black  Man  into  the  White 
Man's  Club  against  our  will,  nor  the  Yellow  Man 
against  his  will.  There  will  be  no  more  great  em- 
pires, and  no  more  oppressed  nationalities;  no  more 
crusades,  and  therefore  no  more  pilgrimages  of 
peace.  There  will  be  no  more  laws,  and  no  more 
prisons.  There  will  be  no  more  creeds,  and  no  more 
catechisms, — and  the  catechisms  are  a  thousandfold 
more  wicked  than  the  creeds. 

For  the  Clubs  are  not  all  alike,  neither  are  they 
meant  to  be  all  alike.  They  are  meant  to  sort  out 
men  and  women,  each  into  his  own  Club,  to  the  end 
that  they  may  enjoy  themselves,  without  marring 
the  enjoyment  of  others.  In  the  long-run  they  tend 
to  mount  in  an  upward  spiral,  and  to  draw  the  Rules 
of  Good  Manners  from  the  highest  Club.  And  that 
is  how  Hope  works  in  the  evolution  of  behaviour. 

The  Coming  Man  is  there.  He  is  the  member 
of  the  highest  Club.  And,  as  I  hope,  he  will  be 
neither  the  furious  enslaver  of  millionairism,  nor 
the  ticketed  and  machine-made  doll  of  socialism, 
neither  will  he  be  like  the  mad  saint  of  the  Dark 
Age.  He  will  be  first  and  foremost  a  good-tempered 
Man,  trying  to  play  the  Game  according  to  the 
Rules,  and  ever  ready  to  learn,  and  to  change  the 
Rules  of  the  Club  when  the  Rules  of  the  Game  are 
being  changed  by  the  Man  Outside.  I  foresee  that 
he  will  not  all  at  once  beat  his  sword  into  a  plough- 
share, but  that  he  will  in  time  put  a  button  on  his 
foil,  and  that  when  he  finds  he  must  fight,  he  will 


310  The  New  Word 

fall  on,  not  spitting  and  snarling  like  a  beast,  but 
like  a  gentleman,  raising  his  sword  to  the  salute, 
and  keeping  loyally  the  Rules  of  the  Fencing- School. 


yii 


Now  I  have  done  putting  together  these  sticks  and 
straws  of  verihood  and  falsehood;  and  I  have  woven 
a  nest,  but  how  unlike  that  dome  which  only  hope 
can  build!  I  have  woven  it,  as  though  round  my 
own  mind,  and  yet  It  does  not  altogether  follow 
the  shape  of  my  own  mind.  So  does  the  bee,  work- 
ing in  the  midst  of  other  bees,  to  fashion  its  round 
cell,  find  at  the  last  that  It  has  wrought  a  hexagon, 
for  so  has  overwrought  the  bee  outside. 

The  man  outside  me  all  this  time  has  been  my 
Testator,  with  whom  I  have  wrought  as  a  faithful 
wordsmlth,  striking  blow  for  blow,  to  forge  upon 
the  anvil  of  sense  a  definition  of  hope  that  should 
ring  true  in  the  ear  of  the  Materialist  as  well  as  of 
the  Idealist. 

I  read  this  great  Bequest  as  a  bequest  to  Hope, 
but  not  to  every  hope.  I  read  It  as  a  bequest  to  the 
highest  hope,  and  to  the  Interpretation  of  that 
Hope.  I  read  It  as  a  prayer  for  Light.  I  read  it 
as  the  prayer  of  one  who  walked  In  darkness,  but 
hoped  for  light;  and  as  an  appeal  from  the  darkness 
to  the  Light. 

I  have  seen  an  altar  to  the  Unknown  God. 


TWENTY-FIRST  HEAD 


THE   HEIR 

The  Swedish  Academy. — i.      The  Palm. 

'  I  ""HE  task  to  which  the  Trustees  of  this  bequest 
are  called  is  the  highest  and  the  most  difficult 
yet  offered  by  a  man  to  men. 

If  this  Will  is  to  be  carried  out  it  can  only  be  in 
spite  of  many  mistakes.  Many  an  impostor,  many 
a  charlatan,  must  receive  the  Nobel  Prize.  Others, 
again,  must  seem  to  receive  it.  The  prize  must  be 
denied  to  yonder  stately  Aeneid  swelling  with  the 
majesty  of  Rome,  and  must  be  given  to  what  inco- 
herent argument,  written  in  what  slave's  dialect,  by 
this  tentmaker  of  Tarsus. 

For  the  prophet  is  only  against  his  will  a  writer. 
His  utterance  is  most  often  broken  and  disjointed. 
His  words  are  hints,  not  definitions,  and  parables 
rather  than  commandments.  The  spirit  that  moves 
him  is  beyond  his  own  control,  and  when  the  virtue 
has  gone  out  of  him  he  is  no  more,  often  he  is  less, 
than  other  men. 

The  Trustees  cannot  rely  on  any  aid  from  outside 
themselves.  For  the  prophet  is  not  without  honour 
save  in  his  own  country,  and  in  his  own  generation, 
and  in  his  own  Academy. 

They  cannot  carry  out  the  Will  without  taking 
311 


3ia  The  New  Word 

the  place  once  held  by  General  Councils,  and  by 
Colleges  of  Pontiffs,  whose  seat  was  on  another  sea. 
They  should,  by  their  bestowal  of  this  legacy,  choose 
between  the  books  of  hope,  and  draw  up  the  canon 
of  the  scriptures  of  the  new  world.  The  last  canon 
was  drawn  up  by  mobs  of  howling  bishops  only 
kept  by  Roman  soldiery  from  shedding  each  other's 
blood.  The  new  one  would  be  drawn  up  by  a  com- 
mittee of  men  of  letters  meeting  quietly  In  the  far 
North  to  dispose  of  a  sum  of  money  not  their  own, 
and  thereby  helping  to  shape  the  new  hope  of  man- 
kind. 

Was  not  something  like  this  in  the  mind  of  the 
Testator;  and  did  It  not  form  part  of  his  purpose 
that  his  country  should  renew  her  old  renown,  and 
become  In  the  new  age  of  peace,  as  once  and  again 
in  the  past  ages  of  war,  the  sword  and  buckler  of 
mankind  against  the  enslavers,  of  the  spirit  as  of 
the  frame?  Did  not  his  vision  show  him  the  new 
Hall  of  the  Aesir,  rebuilt  In  the  White  City  of  the 
North,  the  City  of  Hope,  to  be  a  refuge  and  a  place 
of  comfort  for  the  exiles  of  the  spirit,  whither  as  to 
a  lighthouse  voyagers  from  all  lands  should  turn 
their  eyes  in  longing;  a  hearth  of  glory — 

"Whither,  as  to  a  fountain,  other  stars 
Repair,   and   in   their   golden   urns  draw  light." 


The  Heir  313 


Gentlemen  of  the  Swedish  Academy, — 

If  you  should  ever  so  far  honour  these  struggling 
words  as  to  read  them,  and,  if  it  may  be  so,  find 
in  them  anything  not  written  altogether  vainly,  you 
may  allow  me  a  last  word  face  to  face. 

It  is  written  in  the  book  of  Mang  the  Learner, 
whom  we  are  taught  to  call  Mencius,  that  the  great 
man  is  he  who  has  kept  his  child's  heart.  You  are 
great  men,  and  therefore  you  have  kept  your  child's 
heart,  and  it  is  to  that  heart  that  I  am  writing,  and 
not  to  those  great  men  before  whose  company  I 
have  no  title  by  which  I  may  appear.  Give  me 
leave  to  wrestle  with  the  Child  in  the  Swedish 
Academy  on  behalf  of  a  child  outside. 

The  child  is  my  client  in  this  case.  I  have  noth- 
ing more  to  say  on  behalf  of  the  Idealist.  He  enters 
into  this  matter  as  the  Testator's  hireling,  and  not 
as  his  heir.  The  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire, 
according  to  his  labour.  It  is  for  you  to  mark  out 
the  work,  and  bestow  the  hire  when  it  is  earned. 
I  ask  you  now  to  think  of  the  child. 

To  spell  the  word  childhood  with  a  capital  letter, 
and  make  of  it  a  new  idol  such  as  that  word  hu- 
manity, would  be  to  bring  a  new  folly  into  a 
crowded  world.  For  the  child  is  only  the  coming 
man;  and  the  question  is  how  he  can  be  helped 
most  to  become  the  best  man. 


314  The  New  Word 

Let  us  ask  him.  And  listen! — that  which  we  call 
education,  the  child  himself  calls  cramming. 

When  you  are  setting  about  the  drawing  up  of 
that  great  canon  of  the  books  of  hope,  I  ask  you 
not  to  forget  the  lesson-books  of  the  child.  I  know 
of  no  books  of  a  more  materialistic  tendency  than 
most  of  them  are.  Think  It  not  too  far  beneath 
the  dignity  of  letters  to  begin  the  new  literature 
where  the  child  begins.  It  Is  the  first  book  that 
counts.  By  the  time  you  have  written  the  child's 
catechism  you  have  half  written  the  man's  creed. 

Deem  It  not  wrong  to  think  a  little  of  the  bright- 
est child,  as  your  Testator  thought  of  the  brightest 
man;  the  child  who  Is  to  lead  the  other  children, 
and,  by  leading,  serve  them.  Let  him  be  your  first 
care.  Give  light  to  him.  Let  his  brain  grow.  Tear 
off  the  bandages  that  will  not  let  it  grow.  Unscrew 
the  Iron  clamps.  Give  the  child  freedom  to  become 
a  man. 

Before  we  can  have  hopeful  books  we  must  have 
hopeful  words.  That  Is  the  gist  of  all  my  argu- 
ment.   Let  me  leave  off  with  one  such  word. 

It  shall  be  the  word  palm,  which  lexicographers 
tell  us  Is  the  Latin  palma,  and  means  a  tree  that 
grows  in  Africa  and  the  Levant.  And  on  a  day 
called  In  our  kalendar  Palm  Sunday,  African-minded 
men  are  taking  children  Into  their  Latin  buildings, 
and  putting  Into  their  hands  dead  leaves  from  the 
Levant,  and  bidding  them  think  of  children  In  Jeru- 
salem two  thousand  years  ago.     But  the  country 


The  Heir  315 

folk  on  that  day  take  living  flowers,  and  place  them 
on  the  tombs  of  their  dead,  as  a  sign  of  the  new 
life,  and  they  call  the  day  Flowering  Sunday. 

Now  one  day  in  spring,  while  I  was  first  ponder- 
ing what  I  should  write  to  you,  I  had  been  reading 
a  book  by  a  French  writer,  the  name  of  which  was 
The  Cathedral.  The  writer  begins  by  praising  the 
atmosphere  of  his  cathedral,  as  he  says,  with  its 
mild,  flat  air  as  of  a  cellar,  and  its  faint  smell  of 
oil. — And  laying  down  the  book,  I  walked  out  in 
the  fields  with  some  friends  of  mine,  and  presently 
we  came  to  a  stream,  in  whose  bed  I  saw  some 
bushes  budding  and  growing;  and  I  happened  to 
ask  my  friends  what  they  were. 

The  answer  was  that  they  were  palms. 

I  was  puzzled.  With  my  Lathamised  mind  T 
could  not  understand  this  answer.  I  could  only 
think  of  the  Mediterranean  palm.s.  I  asked  my 
friends  again ;  and  they  told  me,- — "  When  they  are 
like  that  the  country  people  call  them  palms." 

As  soon  as  I  heard  of  the  country  people  I  knew 
of  course  that  I  was  listening  to  a  greater  authority 
on  the  English  language  than  Doctor  Latham.  I 
questioned  my  friends  further,  and  learned  that  this 
name  was  given,  not  only  to  the  bushes  by  the 
stream,  but  to  others;  that  it  was  not  the  name  of 
the  plants,  but  of  the  branches,  and  even  more  of 
the  buds;  that  it  was  not  only  a  noun  but  a  verb, 
since  the  country  folk  say  that  the  willows  are  palm- 
ing, when  the  life  within  them  begins  to  swell  forth. 


3i6  The  New.  Word 

And  thus  I  saw  that  I  was  dealing  with  an  old,  old 
word,  perhaps  not  the  same  word  with  the  Latin 
palma  at  all,  but  only  spelt  the  same  way  by  the 
monks,  perhaps  a  word  carried  southward  by  the 
forefathers  of  Rome;  at  any  rate  a  word  rooted 
in  the  north  for  ages  before  the  Romans  ever  heard 
of  Britain. 

I  followed  this  word  to  the  Baltic  Sea.  I  found 
it  beside  Lake  Wetter,  bearing  the  same  meaning 
to  the  country  folk,  dressed  in  the  same  foreign 
spelling  by  the  learned.  I  found  that  in  Finland, 
where  no  Roman  monk  has  ever  trod,  where  Chris- 
tianity is  a  thing  of  yesterday,  where  neither  Aryan 
words  nor  Latin  spellings  have  taken  root,  the  Fin- 
nish folk  went  forth  on  a  day  in  spring,  and  plucked 
these  living  palms,  and  decked  their  homes  with 
them.  And  coming  back,  I  found  an  old  man  whom 
I  know  very  well,  born  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and 
long  a  town-dweller,  going  out  on  a  day  in  spring, 
and  plucking  thest  very  palms,  and  decking  his 
home  with  them,  without  knowing  why. — I  have  not 
yet  been  able  to  persuade  any  philologist  that  this 
immemorial  instinct  is  not,  name  and  thing,  a  Ro- 
man lesson. 

And  consider  how  the  materialist,  by  shutting  his 
eyes  to  the  prophetic  significance  of  words,  misses 
even  their  history.  For  the  key  to  this  old  folk 
word  was  given  to  me  by  a  little  Swiss  child  in  the 
Jura,  whom  I  overheard  using  the  name  paume  for 


The  Heir  %iy 

a  ball ;  the  old  French  name  which  the  French  word- 
books now  confine  to  the  base  of  the  hand,  and  the 
game  of  tennis.  And  so  the  expression  palm  of  the 
hand  is  seen  to  have  the  same  origin  as  ball  of  the 
thumb;  and  we  can  follow  it  up  to  words  like 
pomme  and  pommel,  and  the  word  paumure,  the 
place  on  a  stag's  head  from  which  the  horns  swell 
and  sprout,  and  thence  to  the  palming  willows. 
Doubtless  the  country  folk  know  nothing  about  the 
Roman  incantations  of  the  learned;  for  them  this 
word  is  quick  and  not  dead;  and  in  their  ears  Palm- 
ing Sunday  suggests  the  renewal  of  life,  and  not  the 
worship  of  dead  Mediterranean  leaves. 

When  I  had  read  that  tiny  riddle  it  seemed  to 
me  that  this  word  palm  might  be  used  to  sum  up 
the  great  question  of  our  day.  Whether  is  it  better 
that,  when  this  day  in  Spring  comes  round,  we 
should  take  White  children  into  that  Black  build- 
ing, with  its  mild,  flat  air  as  of  a  cellar,  and  its 
faint  reek  of  oil;  and  put  into  their  hands  dried 
leaves  from  the  Levant;  and  say  to  them, — "This 
is  because  of  what  some  little  Jewish  children  did 
two  thousand  years  ago;" — or  is  it  better  that  we 
lead  them  out  Into  the  fields,  into  the  fresh  air  of 
Heaven;  and  show  to  them  the  true  palms;  and  say 
to  them, — "This  is  the  Day  of  the  Buds.  The  win- 
ter is  over,  the  spring  is  here,  and  the  Great  Life 
outside  us  is  renewing  itself  again.  We  hope  that 
it  is  telling  us  that  our  life,  too,  will  be  renewed, 
and  that  we  shall  go  on  from  life  to  life,  ever  learn- 


3i8  The  New  Word 

ing  and  knowing  more  of  that  Great  Life  that  our 
forefathers  called  God." 

There  is  the  question  that  Idealism  must  answer, 
or  perish.  The  task  of  Idealism  is  not  to  reconcile 
Science  with  Religion,  which  means  to  drag  down 
the  White  Man's  faith  to  the  level  of  the  Black 
Man's  fancy;  but  to  reconcile  Science  with  Litera- 
ture, to  put  closer  knowledge  into  more  glorious 
words,  and,  in  the  beginning,  to  tell  children  the 
truth. 

What  answer  the  child  wants  us  to  give  to  the 
question  we  know  already.  No  man  shall  ever  tell 
me  that  the  child  does  not  want  to  be  told  the 
truth.  The  child  cannot  be  silenced.  He  cannot  be 
got  rid  of.  He  is  always  coming  into  the  world, 
and  he  is  always  asking  to  be  told  the  truth.  Why 
not  tell  the  child  the  truth? 

Give  the  child  leave  to  grow.  Give  the  child 
leave  to  live.  Give  the  child  leave  to  hope,  and 
to  hope  truly.  He  is  my  client.  I  have  high  war- 
rant for  what  I  do.  I  set  him  in  the  midst  of  the 
Swedish  Academy.  He  is  the  plaintiff  in  this  case. 
I  say  he  is  mankind.  I  say  he  is  the  heir  of  Alfred 
Bernhard  Nobel,  and  that  his  birthright  is  the  truth. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Swedish  Academy,  consider  of 
your  verdict. 


AUTHOR'S  NOTE   FOR   THE   AMERICAN 
EDITION 

It  so  happens  that  when  I  was  first  putting  forth 
this  little  book,  and  wondering  where  it  would  find 
readers,  my  hopes  fixed  themselves  chiefly  on  the 
United  States;  and  I  formed  the  ambition  that 
"  The  New  Word "  should  be  born  an  American 
citizen.  But  the  difficulty  of  finding  any  agent  to 
whom  I  could  confide  the  task  of  production  proved 
too  great  to  be  overcome  by  correspondence,  and  I 
therefore  committed  it  to  the  press  in  the  republic 
of  Geneva.  Since  it  could  not  be  born  in  the  New 
World,  I  am  glad  that  it  should  now  obtain  natural- 
isation. 

In  the  few  years  that  have  gone  by  already  the 
world's  mind  has  been  turning  inside  out  so  fast 
that  I  am  reminded  of  a  remark  made  by  me  to  the 
first  publisher  to  whom  I  showed  the  manuscript: 
"These  thoughts  are  in  the  air;  unless  you  bring 
out  the  book  quickly  half  the  things  it  says  will  no 
longer  be  new."  Since  then  a  series  of  scientific 
workers  such  as  Curie,  Thomson  and  Ostwald  have 
been  making  discoveries,  as  it  were,  in  confirmation 
of  the  argument:  and  it  is  right  that  I  should  put 
that  forward  as  a  ground  for  confidence  in  what  of 
the  prophecy  yet  remains  unfulfilled. 

319 


320  Author's  Note 

Although,  I  am  glad  to  find,  no  one  has  misunder- 
stood the  incidental  part  played  in  these  pages  by 
the  Nobel  bequest  to  Literature,  it  may  be  proper 
that  I  should  acknowledge  the  new  departure  made 
by  the  Trustees  last  year  in  awarding  this  Prize, 
not  to  a  celebrated  author  without  reference  to  the 
character  of  his  works,  but  to  a  book  purporting  to 
come  within  the  class  pointed  out  in  this  interpre- 
tation. 

Once  more  I  wish  to  thank  the  readers  and  re- 
viewers, now  becoming  too  many  to  be  named  sep- 
arately, who  have  given  so  wholehearted  a  welcome 
to  a  book  which  came  before  them  with  such  slight 
credentials. 

The  only  criticism  (of  which  I  need  take  notice) 
so  far  made  has  been  that  the  book  afforded  a 
glimpse,  or  outline,  rather  than  a  full  expression  of 
the  author's  mind.  The  world  does  not  require  to 
be  told,  however,  that  works  involving  long  research 
and  close  meditation  rarely  can  be  undertaken  by 
writers  who  are  not  assured  of  readers.  Spencer, 
in  the  last  century,  adopted  the  plan  of  issuing  a 
business  prospectus  of  the  Synthetical  Philosophy, 
and  soliciting  orders  in  advance  for  the  completed 
work.  "The  New  Word"  is  my  unbusinesslike 
prospectus, — should  the  orders  never  be  forthcom- 
ing, perhaps  hereafter  it  may  serve  as  my  apology. 

A.  U. 


Date  Due 


